Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Home As A Legal Concept, Benjamin Barros
Home As A Legal Concept, Benjamin Barros
ExpressO
This article, which is the first comprehensive discussion of the American legal concept of home, makes two major contributions. First, the article systematically examines how homes are treated more favorably than other types of property in a wide range of legal contexts, including criminal law and procedure, torts, privacy, landlord-tenant, debtor-creditor, family law, and income taxation. Second, the article considers the normative issue of whether this favorable treatment is justified. The article draws from material on the psychological concept of home and the cultural history of home throughout this analysis, providing insight into the interests at stake in various legal …
Michigan Supreme Court Overturns Landmark Eminent Domain Case, Patricia E. Salkin
Michigan Supreme Court Overturns Landmark Eminent Domain Case, Patricia E. Salkin
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
The Constitutional Failing Of The Anticybersquatting Act, Ned Snow
The Constitutional Failing Of The Anticybersquatting Act, Ned Snow
Faculty Publications
Eminent domain and thought control are occurring in cyberspace. Through the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), the government transfers domain names from domain-name owners to private parties based on the owners' bad-faith intent. The owners receive no just compensation. The private parties who are recipients of the domain names are trademark holders whose trademarks correspond with the domain names. Often the trademark holders have no property rights in those domain names: trademark law only allows mark holders to exclude others from making commercial use of their marks; it does not allow mark holders to reserve the marks for their own …
The Misplaced Flight To Substance, Thomas W. Merrill
The Misplaced Flight To Substance, Thomas W. Merrill
Faculty Scholarship
Courts and commentators have struggled for years to come up with a substantive test for what kinds of condemnations are for a "public use." Does public use mean government ownership and control of property after it is taken? This would preclude delegation of eminent domain to common carriers and utilities. Does public use mean public access to the property after it is taken? This would preclude using eminent domain to acquire facilities off-limits to the public, like prisons.
Faced with these problems of under-inclusion, courts have gravitated to the idea that public use means public purpose. The U.S. Supreme Court …