Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Accrual (1)
- Civil rights (1)
- Common law (1)
- Continuing violations (1)
- Discovery rule (1)
-
- Discrimination (1)
- Employee rights (1)
- Employment law (1)
- Equitable estoppel (1)
- Equitable tolling (1)
- Limitations law (1)
- Policy rationales (1)
- Race riot (1)
- Racial violence (1)
- Reparations (1)
- Repose (1)
- Restitution (1)
- Social norms (1)
- Statute of limitations (1)
- Time barred claims (1)
- Tulsa Race Riot of 1921 (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Statutes Of Limitations: A Policy Analysis In The Context Of Reparations Litigation, Suzette M. Malveaux
Statutes Of Limitations: A Policy Analysis In The Context Of Reparations Litigation, Suzette M. Malveaux
Publications
This article discusses the underlying policy rationales for statutes of limitations and their exceptions, as demonstrated by Supreme Court precedents. This article explores limitations law in the context of a case brought by African-American survivors of the Tulsa Race Riot of 1921 who sought restitution from the local government for its participation in one of the worst race riots in American history, in violation of their constitutional and federal civil rights. Using the Tulsa case as an exemplar, this article analyzes the propriety of the case’s dismissal as time-barred, and contends that this outcome was unwarranted under precedents and failed …
Where There's At-Will, There Are Many Ways: Redressing The Increasing Incoherence Of Employment At Will, Scott A. Moss
Where There's At-Will, There Are Many Ways: Redressing The Increasing Incoherence Of Employment At Will, Scott A. Moss
Publications
Employment at will, the doctrine holding that employees have no legal remedy for unfair terminations because they hold their jobs at the will of the employer, has become mired in incoherence. State courts praise the common law rule as "essential to free enterprise" and "central to the free market," but in recent years they increasingly have riddled the rule with exceptions, allowing employee claims for whistleblowing, fraud, etc. Yet states have neither rejected employment at will nor shown any consistency in recognizing exceptions. Strikingly, states cite the same rationales to adopt and reject opposite exceptions, as a case study of …