本书主要介绍英美法中的合同法和侵权法。针对每一部门法的特点,分别讨论合同的成立、履行与抗辩,以及故意侵权、过失侵权以及严格责任侵权等方面。除了讨论实体法内容,本书还从案例阅读与分析的角度引导读者深入学习英美法的精髓。本书的特点之一是英文语言**,并辅以适当的中文解释和介绍;二是适应的读者群比较广泛,既可以用作法科学生的法律英语课程教材,也可以作为法科学生的英美法或比较法全英文课程的教材,还可以为其他对英美法感兴趣的读者提供全面的英美合同法与侵权法的知识。本书资料来源丰富,既有国外原版著作和判例,也包括国内学者的观点。 英美合同侵权法_高凌云 编_复旦大学出版社_

PART I COMMON LAW OF CONTRACT
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1. Contracts and Contract Law
1.1Definition of “Contract”
1.2Sources of the Law of Contract
2. Classifications of Contracts
3. Case 1: Hawkins v. McGee
Review Questions
CHAPTER 2 FORMATION OF CONTRACT017
1. Offer
1.1Elements of Offer
1.2Case 2: Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.
1.3Invitation to Make an Offer
1.4Case 3: Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus
Store
1.5Termination of Offer
1.6Case 4: Ardente v. Horan
2. Acceptance
2.1Elements of Acceptance
2.2Effectiveness of Acceptance
3. Consideration
3.1Elements of Consideration
3.2Case 5: Hamer v. Sidway
3.3Case 6: Harris v. Time, Inc.
3.4Invalid Consideration
3.5Case 7: Slattery v. Wells Fargo Armored Service
Corp.
3.6Promissory Estoppel
3.7Case 8: Ricketts v. Scothorn
Review Questions
CHAPTER 3 DEFENSES
1. Misrepresentation
2. Mistake
3. Duress
4. Undue Influence
5. Capacity of Parties
6. Illegality
7. Statute of Frauds
8. The Parol Evidence Rule
Review Questions
CHAPTER 4 SELECTED TOPICS ON COMMON LAW OF CONTRACT
1. Performance
2. Remedies
3. Assignment of Contract Rights and Delegation of
Duties
4. Third Party Beneficiaries
PART II COMMON LAW OF TORTS
CHAPTER 5 INTRODUCTION TO TORT LAW
1.Torts vs. Crimes
2.Torts vs. Breach of Contracts
3.Classifications of Torts
4.Remedies
Review Questions
CHAPTER 6 INTENTIONAL TORTS
1.The General Elements of Intentional Torts
2.Intentional Torts to the Person
2.1Battery and Assault
2.2False Imprisonment
2.3Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
3.Intentional Torts to Property
3.1Trespass and Nuisance
3.2Conversion
4.Defenses to Intentional Torts
4.1Case 19:Katko v. Briney
4.2Case 20:Courvoisier v. Raymond
5.Intentional Torts to Economic and Dignitary
Interests
5.1Defamation
5.2Invasion of Privacy
Review Questions
CHAPTER 7 TORTS OF NEGLIGENCE
1.Duty
1.1The General Duty
1.2To Whom the Duty of Care Owed
1.3Standard of Care
1.4Duty Owed by Owners and Occupiers of Land
1.**ffirmative Duty to Act
1.6Case 26:Tubbs v. Argus
2.Breach
3.Damage
4.Causation
4.1Case 28:Lyons v. Midnight Sun Transportation
Services, Inc.
4.2Case 29:Palsgraf v. The Long Island Railroad
Co.
5.Defenses to Negligence
Review Questions
CHAPTER 8 STRICT LIABILITY
1.A Prima Facie Case
2.Products Liability
3.Defenses to Strict Liability
Review Questions
REFERENCES

The Supreme Court of Indiana in L. S. Ayres, supra, found the appellant liable for aggravation of injuries when it failed to extricate the appellee, a six year old boy, whose fingers were caught in the moving parts of an escalator, even though the jury conclusively established that the appellant was not negligent with respect to the choice, construction, or manner of operating the elevator. In so holding, the Supreme Court stated that it may be deduced from Tippecanoe Loan, etc. Co. v. Cleveland, etc. R. Co.9 supra, "that there may be a legal obligation to take positive or affirmative steps to effect the rescue of a person who is helpless and in a situation of peril, when the one proceeded against is a master or an invitor or when the injury resulted from use of an instrumentality under the control of the defendant. "
The doctrine of law as set forth in Restatement (Second) of Torts, ￥ 322, p. 133, adds credence to these two Indiana cases. "... If the actor knows or has reason to know that by his conduct, whether tortious or innocent, he has caused such bodily harm to another as to make him helpless and in danger of future harm, the actor is under a duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent such further harm. "
One distinction between the Ayres, supra and Tippecanoe, supra cases and the case at bar is that both of the former cases involve situations where an economic advantage flows to the defendant, while the case -at bar does not. It is the opinion of this Court that an affirmative duty to render reasonable aid and assistance is not limited to those cases involving the flow of an economic advantage to the alleged defendant. The court, in both the above mentioned cases, stated that other relationship may impose a like obligation and it is the opinion of the Court that the case at bar presents a situation in which an affirmative duty arises to render reasonable aid and assistance to one who is helpless and in a situation of peril, when the injury resulted from use of an instrumentality under the control of the defendant.
In the case at bar, the appellant received her injuries from an instrumentality under the control of the appellee. Under the rule stated above and on the authority of the cases cited, this was a sufficient relationship to impose a duty to render reasonable aid and assistance, a duty for the breach of which the appellee is liable for the additional injuries suffered. We are of the opinion that the court below erred in sustaining the demurrer to appellant's Second Amended Complaint.
This cause is reversed and remanded for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
Judgment reversed.
……

“博学”是复旦大学出版社重,点推出的精品教材的品牌标志。“博学·法学系列”邀请中国人民大学法学院、北京大学法学院、武汉大学法学院、复旦大学法学院、清华大学法学院、浙江大学法学院、中国政法大学、华东政法大学、南京师范大学法学院等高校的**法学家和学科带头人领衔主编,由上述高校及中南财经政法大学、西南政法大学、厦门大学、中山大学、辽宁大学、南京大学、苏州大学、安徽大学、山东大学、南昌大学、湘潭大学、兰州大学等政法院校和综合性大学法学院选派的**教授、副教授联袂参编,作者权威,阵容强大。在内容和体例上,既注重保留传统教材的精华,又力求有所突破和创新,是一套面向21世纪、反映我国当今法学教育*新状况的高品质法学教材。