Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Appellate (1)
- Circuit split (1)
- Clapper v. Amnesty International USA (1)
- Clean Air Act (1)
- Clean Water Act (1)
-
- Commerce Clause (1)
- Consent by registration (1)
- Data breach (1)
- Energy (1)
- Environmental (1)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1)
- Federalism (1)
- Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (1)
- Grand Jury (1)
- Implicit consent (1)
- Informed consent (1)
- International Shoe (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Lyft (1)
- Notice (1)
- Personal jurisdiction (1)
- Pike v. Bruce Church (1)
- Preenption (1)
- Privacy (1)
- Procedure (1)
- Prosecution (1)
- Rule 11 (1)
- Standing (1)
- Uber (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Federal Common Law, Climate Torts, And Preclusion, Tom Boss
Federal Common Law, Climate Torts, And Preclusion, Tom Boss
Washington and Lee Law Review Online
Municipalities have been trying for decades to hold energy companies accountable for their role in the climate change crisis. In an effort to prevent suits, these companies are pushing the novel legal theory that federal common law provides a basis for jurisdiction in federal court over these claims. Once in federal court, the defendants argue that the very federal common law that served as the basis for removal has been displaced by the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts. This would then justify dismissal of the entire case for failure to state a claim. Luckily for the plaintiffs, nearly all …
The Cost Of Doing Business? Corporate Registration As Valid Consent To General Personal Jurisdiction, Matthew D. Kaminer
The Cost Of Doing Business? Corporate Registration As Valid Consent To General Personal Jurisdiction, Matthew D. Kaminer
Washington and Lee Law Review Online
Every state has a statute that requires out-of-state corporations to register with a designated official before doing business there, but courts disagree on what impact, if any, those statutes can or should have on personal jurisdiction doctrine. A minority of states interpret compliance with their registration statutes as the company’s consent to general personal jurisdiction, meaning it can be sued on any cause of action there, even those unrelated to the company’s conduct in that state. The United States Supreme Court upheld this “consent by registration” theory over 100 years ago, but since then has manifested a sea change in …
In Re Government Attorney-Client Privilege: A Categorical Rule To Settle The Issue, Luke Charette
In Re Government Attorney-Client Privilege: A Categorical Rule To Settle The Issue, Luke Charette
Washington and Lee Law Review Online
This Note explores the reasoning and factors used by each of the federal circuits in deciding whether or not to uphold attorney-client privilege between the government and the lawyers representing it. After considering those factors, this Note argues that there should be a categorical rule that neither a state nor the federal government may invoke the attorney-client privilege in response to a criminal grand jury subpoena. To justify this conclusion, this Note outlines how current government attorney-client privilege case law, as well as the policy underpinnings of the privilege itself, dictate that a categorical rule is appropriate.
If The Shoe Fits: Rethinking Minimum Contacts And The Fsia Commercial Activity Exception, Jacqueline M. Fitch
If The Shoe Fits: Rethinking Minimum Contacts And The Fsia Commercial Activity Exception, Jacqueline M. Fitch
Washington and Lee Law Review Online
The question explored in this Note is whether, under the direct effect clause of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act commercial activities exception, a foreign sovereign must have minimum contacts with the United States in order for a U.S. court to assert personal jurisdiction over the entity. Examining personal jurisdiction over foreign states under the direct effect clause requires exploring the interaction between constitutional law and principles of international law. The minimum contacts analysis highlights the tension between applying constitutional due process protection to a foreign state, while simultaneously asserting jurisdiction over its commercial activities. Denying jurisdiction over a foreign sovereign …
Mandating Rule 11 Sanctions? Here We Go Again!, Edward D. Cavanagh
Mandating Rule 11 Sanctions? Here We Go Again!, Edward D. Cavanagh
Washington and Lee Law Review Online
The House of Representatives has passed H.R. 720, a bill that would amend Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by re‑instituting mandatory sanctions for Rule 11 violations and essentially restoring Rule 11 to its contents under the 1983 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The legislation would mandate imposition of monetary sanctions and eliminate any restrictions on when a Rule 11 motion could be filed. The bill would thus scuttle the 1993 Amendments, which (1) entrusted the sanctions decision to the sound discretion of the trial court; (2) provided a 21‑day safe harbor period that …
Clapper Dethroned: Imminent Injury And Standing For Data Breach Lawsuits In Light Of Ashley Madison, Arthur R. Vorbrodt
Clapper Dethroned: Imminent Injury And Standing For Data Breach Lawsuits In Light Of Ashley Madison, Arthur R. Vorbrodt
Washington and Lee Law Review Online
No abstract provided.
Keep On Truckin', Uber: Using The Dormant Commerce Clause To Challenge Regulatory Roadblocks To Tncs, Boris Bindman
Keep On Truckin', Uber: Using The Dormant Commerce Clause To Challenge Regulatory Roadblocks To Tncs, Boris Bindman
Washington and Lee Law Review Online
No abstract provided.