Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Motions For Appointment Of Counsel And The Collateral Order Doctrine, Michigan Law Review
Motions For Appointment Of Counsel And The Collateral Order Doctrine, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that denials of motions for appointment of counsel should be immediately appealable under the collateral order exception to 28 U.S.C. ยง 1291. Part I examines the extent to which the collateral order doctrine modifies the finality rule. It argues that recent Supreme Court decisions that at first appear to have narrowed the doctrine have in fact only restated it. Part II applies the collateral order doctrine to orders denying appointment of counsel, concluding that such denials qualify for immediate review. Part III argues that policy considerations support this conclusion.
A Statutory Analysis Of The Right Of U.S. Lawyers To Practice In Japan, Cecelia Norman
A Statutory Analysis Of The Right Of U.S. Lawyers To Practice In Japan, Cecelia Norman
Michigan Journal of International Law
This note argues that the JFBA's position is legally untenable. There is no legal bar to the establishment of firms by U.S. attorneys unlicensed to practice in Japan, provided they restrict their activities to advising non-Japanese companies on foreign and international law. Two central issues shape this debate: (1) the extent of the bengoshi monopoly conferred by the Lawyer Law; and (2) the scope of Japan's obligation to the United States under the Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation (FCN Treaty) concluded in 1953.
Legal Services And The Trade And Tariff Act Of 1984, Michael K. Grace
Legal Services And The Trade And Tariff Act Of 1984, Michael K. Grace
Michigan Journal of International Law
Part I of this note outlines the major nontariff barriers (NTBs) to trade in services. Part II discusses the provisions of the Trade and Tariff Act that are aimed at the reduction of those barriers. Part III examines the applicability of the TTA to legal services and the potential limitations on the provisions of an international agreement for that particular service industry. It concludes that concerns over state sovereignty, while no longer posing a constitutional obstacle to an international agreement on trade in services, will remain an important political force in the shaping of such an agreement.