Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Choosing The Appropriate State Statute Of Limitations For Section 1983 Claims After Wilson V. Garcia: A Theory Applied To Maryland Law, Stephen J. Shapiro
Choosing The Appropriate State Statute Of Limitations For Section 1983 Claims After Wilson V. Garcia: A Theory Applied To Maryland Law, Stephen J. Shapiro
University of Baltimore Law Review
Forty-two U.S.C. section 1983 provides individuals with a federal cause of action for violations of their constitutional rights by persons acting under color of state law. The statute itself contains no limitations period for the filing of suits and, in keeping with settled federal practice, the lower federal courts have looked to state law to determine the proper limitations period. Because the lower courts adopted various inconsistent approaches to determining the appropriate state limitations period, the Supreme Court, in Wilson v. Garcia, held in 1985 that the federal courts should adopt the state limitations period for personal injury actions. In …
The Uncertain Scope Of The Plain View Doctrine, Howard E. Wallin
The Uncertain Scope Of The Plain View Doctrine, Howard E. Wallin
University of Baltimore Law Review
In recent years the Supreme Court has expanded the plain view exception to the warrant requirement by relaxing the prior valid intrusion and the inadvertency requirements. This article examines the resulting confusion in the state courts and identifies areas where judicial clarification is needed.
Casenotes: Statute Of Limitations — Medical Malpractice — Constitutional Law — Five Year Statute Of Repose On Medical Malpractice Claims That Commences When An Injury Occurs Is Constitutional. Hill V. Fitzgerald, 304 Md. 689, 501 A.2d 27 (1985), Nancy E. Leibowitz
University of Baltimore Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Copyright Clause: "A Charter For A Living People", Ralph Oman
The Copyright Clause: "A Charter For A Living People", Ralph Oman
University of Baltimore Law Review
Mr. Oman has chosen the 200th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution to deliver the following paean to the copyright clause.
Comments: Blasting The Cap: Constitutional Issues Arising From Maryland's Limitation Of Noneconomic Damages In Personal Injury Claims, James R. Andersen
Comments: Blasting The Cap: Constitutional Issues Arising From Maryland's Limitation Of Noneconomic Damages In Personal Injury Claims, James R. Andersen
University of Baltimore Law Review
A topic of fervent debate in recent years has been the growing crisis in personal injury liability insurance, particularly in the area of medical malpractice. Insurers, doctors, and lawyers have presented differing theories as to the cause and solution of the problem. In 1986, the Maryland General Assembly sought to resolve the crisis by limiting the amount recoverable for noneconomic damages in a personal injury action to $350,000. Similar provisions in other states have been struck down as unconstitutional. This comment examines the constitutionality of Maryland's noneconomic damages limitation and argues that the damage limitation violates both the state and …
Casenotes: Constitutional Criminal Procedure — Self-Incrimination — Court May Compel Witnesses To Testify Before A Grand Jury Who Are Immune From Prosecution In The United States, But Amenable To Prosecution In A Foreign Jurisdiction. United States V. Under Seal, 794 F.2d 920 (4th Cir.), Cert. Denied, 107 S. Ct. 331 (1986), Ellen Beth Berkow
University of Baltimore Law Review
No abstract provided.