Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (16)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (14)
- Pepperdine University (13)
- Osgoode Hall Law School of York University (9)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (9)
-
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (9)
- West Virginia University (6)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (5)
- University of Michigan Law School (4)
- Cleveland State University (3)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (3)
- Brooklyn Law School (2)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (2)
- Pace University (2)
- Seattle University School of Law (2)
- University of Georgia School of Law (2)
- University of San Diego (2)
- American University Washington College of Law (1)
- Barry University School of Law (1)
- Georgia State University College of Law (1)
- SJ Quinney College of Law, University of Utah (1)
- Southern Methodist University (1)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (1)
- University of Massachusetts School of Law (1)
- University of Montana (1)
- University of New Hampshire (1)
- University of Richmond (1)
- University of Washington School of Law (1)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (1)
- William & Mary Law School (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Touro Law Review (16)
- Indiana Law Journal (13)
- Osgoode Hall Law Journal (9)
- Villanova Law Review (9)
- Pepperdine Law Review (8)
-
- West Virginia Law Review (6)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (5)
- Michigan Law Review (4)
- Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law (4)
- American Indian Law Review (3)
- Cleveland State Law Review (3)
- Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary (3)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (3)
- Pace International Law Review (2)
- Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal (2)
- San Diego International Law Journal (2)
- Seattle University Law Review (2)
- The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process (2)
- American University Law Review (1)
- Barry Law Review (1)
- Brooklyn Journal of International Law (1)
- Brooklyn Law Review (1)
- Federal Communications Law Journal (1)
- Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law (1)
- Georgia Law Review (1)
- Georgia State University Law Review (1)
- Journal of Business & Technology Law (1)
- Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy (1)
- Northwestern University Law Review (1)
- Public Land & Resources Law Review (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 116
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Surprises In The Skies: Resolving The Circuit Split On How Courts Should Determine Whether An "Accident" Is "Unexpected Or Unusual" Under The Montreal Convention, Ashley Tang
Washington Law Review
Article 17 of both the Montreal Convention and its predecessor, the Warsaw Convention, imposes liability onto air carriers for certain injuries and damages from “accidents” incurred by passengers during international air carriage. However, neither Convention defines the term “accident.” While the United States Supreme Court opined that, for the purposes of Article 17, an air carrier’s liability “arises only if a passenger’s injury is caused by an unexpected or unusual event or happening that is external to the passenger,” it did not explain what standards lower courts should employ to discern whether an event is “unexpected or unusual.” In 2004, …
What It Takes: A Statistical Analysis Of Arkansas Supreme Court’S Petition For Review Process, Justice Rhonda Wood, Jessica Finan Patterson, Brian W. Johnson
What It Takes: A Statistical Analysis Of Arkansas Supreme Court’S Petition For Review Process, Justice Rhonda Wood, Jessica Finan Patterson, Brian W. Johnson
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Solving The Procedural Puzzles Of The Texas Heartbeat Act And Its Imitators: The Potential For Defensive Litigation, Charles W. "Rocky" Rhodes, Howard M. Wasserman
Solving The Procedural Puzzles Of The Texas Heartbeat Act And Its Imitators: The Potential For Defensive Litigation, Charles W. "Rocky" Rhodes, Howard M. Wasserman
SMU Law Review
The Texas Heartbeat Act (SB8) prohibits abortions following detection of a fetal heartbeat, a constitutionally invalid ban under current Supreme Court precedent. But the law adopts a unique enforcement scheme—it prohibits enforcement by government officials in favor of private civil actions brought by “any person,” regardless of injury. Texas sought to burden reproductive-health providers and rights advocates with costly litigation and potentially crippling liability.
In a series of articles, we explore how SB8’s exclusive reliance on private enforcement creates procedural and jurisdictional hurdles to challenging the law’s constitutional validity and obtaining judicial review. This piece explores defensive litigation, in which …
The Rise Of Transnational Commercial Courts: The Astana International Financial Centre Court, Ilias Bantekas
The Rise Of Transnational Commercial Courts: The Astana International Financial Centre Court, Ilias Bantekas
Pace International Law Review
The proliferation of international commercial courts aims to boost income from legal services and serve as a catalyst for newly found rules of law and thus attract investor confidence. The latter is the underlying purpose for the creation of the Astana International Financial Centre (AIFC) and its Court. The Court’s legal framework is set out in the tradition of its competitors in the Gulf and similarly employs an impressive lineup of former senior judges from the United Kingdom. It is a unique experiment because it strives to create a balance between maintaining a judicial institution of the highest caliber while …
An Unfair Cross Section: Federal Jurisdiction For Indian Country Crimes Dismantles Jury Community Conscience, Alana Paris
An Unfair Cross Section: Federal Jurisdiction For Indian Country Crimes Dismantles Jury Community Conscience, Alana Paris
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
Under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, federal jury pools must reflect a fair cross section of the community in which a crime is prosecuted and from which no distinct group in the community is excluded. The community in which a crime is prosecuted varies widely in Indian country based on legislative reforms enacted by Congress to strip indigenous populations of their inherent sovereignty. Under the Major Crimes Act, the federal government has the right to adjudicate all serious crimes committed by one American Indian against another American Indian or non-Indian within Indian country. American Indian defendants under …
A Balanced Consideration Of The Federal Circuit’S Choice-Of-Law Rule, Jennifer E. Sturiale
A Balanced Consideration Of The Federal Circuit’S Choice-Of-Law Rule, Jennifer E. Sturiale
Utah Law Review
The Federal Circuit’s jurisdiction is unique. Unlike the jurisdiction of all other U.S. courts of appeals, the Federal Circuit’s jurisdiction is defined not by its geographical boundaries, but rather by the subject matter of the original claims and compulsory counterclaims. The court has appellate jurisdiction over final decisions from all U.S. district courts if a plaintiff’s claim or a party’s counterclaim arises under the patent laws. From this unusual jurisdictional grant, the Federal Circuit has concluded that, as a policy matter, it should apply and develop its own law only if the legal issue pertains to patent law. For all …
Equity In American And Jewish Law, Itzchak E. Kornfeld , Ph.D.
Equity In American And Jewish Law, Itzchak E. Kornfeld , Ph.D.
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Sticks, Stones, And So-Called Judges: Why The Era Of Trump Necessitates Revisiting Presidential Influence On The Courts, Quinn W. Crowley
Sticks, Stones, And So-Called Judges: Why The Era Of Trump Necessitates Revisiting Presidential Influence On The Courts, Quinn W. Crowley
Indiana Law Journal
This Note will be primarily divided into three main sections. Part I of this Note will begin by discussing the importance of judicial independence in modern society and the role of elected officials in shaping the public perception of the courts. Additionally, as problems of judicial legitimacy are age-old and date back to America’s founding, Part I will include a brief discussion of an early clash between President Thomas Jefferson and the courts.
Parts II and III of this Note will seek to place President Trump’s conduct towards the judicial branch within the proper historical context. Part II examines the …
Residual Discretion: The Concept Of Forum Of Necessity Under The Court Jurisdiction And Proceedings Transfer Act, Michael Sobkin
Residual Discretion: The Concept Of Forum Of Necessity Under The Court Jurisdiction And Proceedings Transfer Act, Michael Sobkin
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
Under section 6 of the CJPTA, a court may hear a case for which it lacks territorial competence under the statute if it is satisfied that: (1) there is no other court outside the province in which the plaintiff can commence the proceeding; or (2) the commencement of the proceeding outside the province cannot reasonably be required. Courts in provinces that have not enacted the CJPTA have grafted a similar discretion on to the common law rules of jurisdiction. This article seeks to determine the intentions of the drafters of the CJPTA in providing for this power and to discuss …
Cross-Border Transfers Of Court Proceedings, Vaughan Black
Cross-Border Transfers Of Court Proceedings, Vaughan Black
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
The Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act might easily have been two statutes rather than one. There could have been a pair of uniform acts, one delineating the territorial competence of the provinces’ superior courts and the other implementing a regime for the cross-border transfer of court proceedings. After all, these two matters are neither logically interdependent nor especially tightly linked. Part 3 of the CJPTA, dealing with transfers of proceedings, is not confined to lawsuits where the initial court takes jurisdiction under Part 2. It applies regardless of whether the initial court bases its jurisdiction on the CJPTA or …
The Court Jurisdiction And Proceedings Transfer Act And The Hague Conference’S Judgments And Jurisdiction Projects, Joost Blom
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
The Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act (CJPTA) codifies the substantive law of jurisdiction in British Columbia, Nova Scotia, and Saskatchewan. One of the questions that may be posed by the future of the CJPTA is how the jurisdictional system that it enacts would function in relation to two potential international conventions that are contemplated by the Hague Conference on Private International Law. One, a convention on the enforcement of judgments, is in an advanced stage of negotiation and may well be adopted by the Hague Conference. It deals with jurisdiction indirectly, by defining jurisdictional standards or “filters” that must …
Judicial Jurisdiction In Canada: The Cjpta—A Decade Of Progress, Janet Walker
Judicial Jurisdiction In Canada: The Cjpta—A Decade Of Progress, Janet Walker
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
In 2016, the Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act (“CJPTA”) marked its tenth year in force. Promulgated by the Uniform Law Conference of Canada, and adopted in British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia, the CJPTA was developed to clarify and advance the law of judicial jurisdiction. In a symposium hosted by Osgoode Hall Law School, ten leading scholars were invited to present papers on specific questions in order to assess the promise of the CJPTA to meet the needs of Canadians in the years ahead and to provide leadership for the law in other parts of Canada. This article provides …
Six Of One, Half A Dozen Of The Other? Jurisdiction In Common Law Canada, Stephen G.A. Pitel
Six Of One, Half A Dozen Of The Other? Jurisdiction In Common Law Canada, Stephen G.A. Pitel
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
This short article considers the central differences in the law on taking jurisdiction in civil and commercial disputes between those common law provinces that have implemented a statute on jurisdiction (British Columbia, Nova Scotia, and Saskatchewan) and those common law provinces that rely on the common law (Alberta, Ontario, and others). It focuses on the distinction between presence and ordinary residence, the role and analysis of presumptive connecting factors for taking jurisdiction, and issues related to immovable property.
Jurisdiction Motions And Access To Justice: An Ontario Tale, Gerard J. Kennedy
Jurisdiction Motions And Access To Justice: An Ontario Tale, Gerard J. Kennedy
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
This article investigates the access to justice concerns surrounding jurisdiction motions in Ontario, having analyzed one hundred and forty-seven jurisdiction motions decided in Ontario between 2010 and 2015. The author challenges the previously expressed view that jurisdiction motions are presently being “abused” by defendants and their counsel. He also suggests that trends in jurisdiction motions this decade point to some improvement from an access to justice perspective. Nonetheless, jurisdiction motions are frequently presenting an impediment to access to justice, with uncertainty in the law likely being the primary reason for this. The author considers potential proposals to address the access …
General Jurisdiction Over Corporate Defendants Under The Cjpta: Consistent With International Standards?, Catherine Walsh
General Jurisdiction Over Corporate Defendants Under The Cjpta: Consistent With International Standards?, Catherine Walsh
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
“General jurisdiction” refers to a court’s competence to adjudicate disputes arising out of a defendant’s activities anywhere in the world. Absent consent or submission, international instruments reserve general jurisdiction over corporations to the states in which the corporation has its registered office, centre of administration, or principal place of business. The bases of general jurisdiction under the Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act (CJPTA) are far broader and include simply having a place of business in the forum or even registering to carry on business there. This article locates the conceptual roots of the CJPTA approach in the traditional common …
Has The Cjpta Readied Canada For The Hague Choice Of Court Convention?, Geneviève Saumier
Has The Cjpta Readied Canada For The Hague Choice Of Court Convention?, Geneviève Saumier
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
This paper examines whether the Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act has readied Canada to adopt the 2005 Hague Choice of Court Convention. Reviewing the Hague Convention as well as previous and current law and cases on forum selection clauses in common law Canada, including the very recent Supreme Court of Canada decision in Douez v Facebook, yields two conclusions. First, there are existing interpretive challenges flowing from gaps in the CJPTA with respect to jurisdictional clauses that need to be addressed. Second, the principles governing forum selection clauses in Canada are largely consistent with those put forward in the …
Three Objections To Forum Of Necessity: Global Access To Justice, International Criminal Law, And Proper Party, Sagi Peari
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
In civil procedure, the plaintiff is the one who initiates the litigation process. In which forum can he or she initiate this process? In very general terms, the Canadian rules of judicial jurisdiction provide the plaintiff with three options for jurisdiction acquisition. First, the jurisdiction can be acquired based on explicit agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant as to the identity of the forum to adjudicate the case. Second, the plaintiff can initiate the litigation in the forum that has the so-called “real and substantial connection” between it and the parties’ specific interaction under the given ground of liability …
The Federal–State Standing Gap: How To Enforce Federal Law In Federal Court Without Article Iii Standing, Peter N. Salib, David K. Suska
The Federal–State Standing Gap: How To Enforce Federal Law In Federal Court Without Article Iii Standing, Peter N. Salib, David K. Suska
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
You, too, can sue Donald Trump under the Emoluments Clause!
Since Inauguration Day, several lawsuits have been filed against President Trump because of his refusal to divest certain assets. They assert that Trump’s business interests conflict with the Emoluments Clause of Article I. That arcane provision forbids certain federal officials from accepting any perquisite or gain from a foreign monarch or state. The suits contend, for example, that a foreign dignitary’s booking of a room at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. would constitute an unlawful emolument.
Most commentators quickly threw cold water on the prospect of any plaintiff …
National Association Of Manufacturers V. Department Of Defense, Summer L. Carmack
National Association Of Manufacturers V. Department Of Defense, Summer L. Carmack
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In an attempt to provide consistency to the interpretation and application of the statutory phrase “waters of the United States,” as used in the Clean Water Act, the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers together passed the WOTUS Rule. Unfortunately, the Rule has created more confusion than clarity, resulting in a number of lawsuits challenging substantive portions of the Rule’s language. National Association of Manufacturers v. Department of Defense did not address those substantive challenges, but instead determined whether those claims challenging the Rule must be filed in federal district courts or federal courts of appeals. In its decision, the …
Context At The International Criminal Court, Hassan Ahmad
Context At The International Criminal Court, Hassan Ahmad
Pace International Law Review
In this article, I propose a contextual approach to ICC jurisdiction normatively to be adopted by the Court’s Office of the Prosecutor and Pre-Trial Chamber in investigating and eventually prosecuting crimes under the Rome Statute. Under this contextual approach, I contend that both the Prosecutor and Pre-Trial Chamber are able to consider evidence outside the traditional notions of territorial and temporal jurisdiction to conceptualize a conflict in its entirety. The totality of cross-border and inter-temporal evidence should be considered when deciding whether to investigate attacks that the Prosecutor has a reasonable basis to believe fall within the Court’s jurisdiction. Procedurally, …
Adverse Interests And Article Iii: A Reply, James E. Pfander, Daniel Birk
Adverse Interests And Article Iii: A Reply, James E. Pfander, Daniel Birk
Northwestern University Law Review
Scholars and jurists have long sought an explanation for why the Framers of Article III distinguished “Cases” from “Controversies.” In a previous article that cataloged the exercise of federal jurisdiction over uncontested matters, such as pension claims, warrant applications, and naturalization proceedings, we tried to provide an answer to this question. We suggested that, at least as to “cases” arising under federal law, the federal courts could exercise what Roman and civil lawyers called non-contentious jurisdiction or, in the words of Chief Justice Marshall, could hear uncontested claims of right in the form prescribed by law. As for “controversies,” by …
Dueling Grants: Reimagining Cafa’S Jurisdictional Provisions, Tanya Pierce
Dueling Grants: Reimagining Cafa’S Jurisdictional Provisions, Tanya Pierce
Georgia State University Law Review
More than a decade after Congress passed the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA), courts continue to disagree as to its application and meaning in a variety of situations, many of which have wide-ranging effects. This article considers a fundamental issue that arises after a certification decision is reached: whether a court’s subject matter jurisdiction under CAFA depends on a class being certified. Specifically, the article considers what happens when a federal court’s subject matter jurisdiction derives solely from CAFA’s minimal diversity jurisdiction provision and a request for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 (Rule 23) …
Is It Safe To Speak Up Now? Evaluating The Expansion Of Whistleblower Protection Act Jurisdiction, Gil Landau
Is It Safe To Speak Up Now? Evaluating The Expansion Of Whistleblower Protection Act Jurisdiction, Gil Landau
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
Whistleblowers have uncovered billions of dollars of fraud and severe national security threats. Nonetheless, for many years, federal employee whistleblowers faced retaliation and termination. Congress passed the Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) in an attempt to protect federal employee whistleblowers. But, the exclusive court for WPA appeals, the Federal Circuit, ignored Congressional intent and limited the WPA’s protections. In 2013, Congress responded by creating a five year experiment, known as “all circuit review,” to determine if WPA claims should also be appealable to the regional circuits. Over the past three years, all circuit review has led to modest changes in WPA …
Original Intent: Understanding The Supreme Court's Original Jurisdiction In Controversies Between States, Kristen A. Linsley
Original Intent: Understanding The Supreme Court's Original Jurisdiction In Controversies Between States, Kristen A. Linsley
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
No abstract provided.
If We Don’T Bring Them To Court, The Terrorists Will Have Won: Reinvigorating The Anti-Terrorist Act And General Jurisdiction In A Post-Daimler Era, Stephen J. Digregoria
If We Don’T Bring Them To Court, The Terrorists Will Have Won: Reinvigorating The Anti-Terrorist Act And General Jurisdiction In A Post-Daimler Era, Stephen J. Digregoria
Brooklyn Law Review
Prior to the Supreme Court's recent general personal jurisdiction decisions in Daimler AG v. Bauman and Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations S.A. v. Brown American terror victims, injured in terror attacks abroad, were able to bring their attackers and those who sponsor them into United States courts for relief. Specifically, groups like the Palestine Liberation Organization (the PLO) and the Palestinian Authority (the PA) had a history of being sued by American victims of terror. In the course of these suits, the PLO and the PA were regularly found subject to the personal jurisdiction of U.S. courts under a theory of …
Infrequently Asked Questions, Edward T. Swaine
Infrequently Asked Questions, Edward T. Swaine
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
If appellate advocates could hear from courts about topics that might be raised during oral argument—as opposed to relying solely on their ability to anticipate the issues—might their answers be better? That seems likely, but it is unlikely that research could confirm that, as judicial practice overwhelmingly favors impromptu questioning. Spontaneity may be harmless if the question was predictable, or unavoidable if a judge just thought of the question. But sometimes advocates have to answer challenging questions concerning the law, facts, or implications of a position—questions that help decide the case, either due to the quality of the answer or …
Judicial Recusation In The Federal Republic Of Germany, Sigmund A. Cohn
Judicial Recusation In The Federal Republic Of Germany, Sigmund A. Cohn
Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law
No abstract provided.
Gateway-Schmateway: An Exchange Between George Bermann And Alan Rau, George Bermann, Alan Scott Rau
Gateway-Schmateway: An Exchange Between George Bermann And Alan Rau, George Bermann, Alan Scott Rau
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
A 21st Century Approach To Personal Jurisdiction, Robert E. Pfeffer
A 21st Century Approach To Personal Jurisdiction, Robert E. Pfeffer
The University of New Hampshire Law Review
[Excerpt] "Personal jurisdiction doctrine plays a major role in many civil disputes in the United States. When the defendant resides in, is incorporated or headquartered in (in the case of a corporation or other business), or is otherwise found in the particular state where suit is brought, personal jurisdiction generally is found to exist and is unproblematic. Major personal jurisdiction issues usually arise when a plaintiff sues the defendant in a state other than the one in which the defendant is located.
In many cases involving parties located in different states, where a suit takes place is as extensively litigated …
The Court Of Appeals Of Virginia Celebrates Thirty Years Of Service To The Commonwealth, Hon. Stephen R. Mccullough, Hon. Marla Graff Decker
The Court Of Appeals Of Virginia Celebrates Thirty Years Of Service To The Commonwealth, Hon. Stephen R. Mccullough, Hon. Marla Graff Decker
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.