Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

University of Richmond

Journal

1981

Discipline
Keyword
Publication

Articles 1 - 30 of 44

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

Spring 1981 Jan 1981

Spring 1981

University of Richmond Magazine

No abstract provided.


Summer 1981 Jan 1981

Summer 1981

University of Richmond Magazine

No abstract provided.


Winter 1981 Jan 1981

Winter 1981

University of Richmond Magazine

No abstract provided.


Fall 1981 Jan 1981

Fall 1981

University of Richmond Magazine

No abstract provided.


Buyer Liability Under Section 2(F) Of The Robinson-Patman Act, Douglas E. Ray Jan 1981

Buyer Liability Under Section 2(F) Of The Robinson-Patman Act, Douglas E. Ray

University of Richmond Law Review

Despite the fact that the 1936 Robinson-Patman Act amendments to the Clayton Act were enacted in an attempt to curb the ability of large businesses to coerce sellers of products into granting them discriminatory price advantages over smaller purchasers, only one section of the Act, section 2(f) which prohibits the knowing inducement or receipt of discriminatory prices, is aimed at buyers. The remainder of the Act is directed toward sellers. Liability under section 2(f) is generally derivative in nature, being based on a preliminary finding of seller liability under another section of the Act. Because of this derivative nature of …


Transforming The Privately Owned Shopping Center Into A Public Forum: Pruneyard Shopping Center V. Robins, James M. Mccauley Jan 1981

Transforming The Privately Owned Shopping Center Into A Public Forum: Pruneyard Shopping Center V. Robins, James M. Mccauley

University of Richmond Law Review

A recent Supreme Court decision has affirmed a state's choice to provide its citizens access to privately owned shopping centers for the purpose of exercising free speech and petition rights. The United States Supreme Court in Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins held that state consitutional provisions permitting individuals to exercise free speech and petition rights on private shopping center property do not violate the shopping center owner's property rights under the fifth and fourteenth amendments or his free speech rights under the first and fourteenth amendments. There exists a delicate balance between the competing in- terests of the shopping center …


Counter Revolution In The Federal Courts Of Appeal - The Aftermath Of Vermont Yankee, Jon A. Mueller Jan 1981

Counter Revolution In The Federal Courts Of Appeal - The Aftermath Of Vermont Yankee, Jon A. Mueller

University of Richmond Law Review

In recent years, there has been growing judicial concern about the fairness of action by administrative agencies and the ability of courts to effectively review this action. This concern stems from the increased use of informal procedures by agencies promulgating rules or orders, to accomplish the congressional objectives set out in their substantive statutes. In response, certain federal courts of appeal have begun to impose upon these agencies more procedural safeguards than are required by either the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) or substantive statutes. These judicially imposed safeguards are more commonly known as hybrid procedures.


University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents Jan 1981

University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents Jan 1981

University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

This is Volume XVI of the University of Richmond Law Review.


Tribute: Robert I. Stevenson, B.J. Brabham Jan 1981

Tribute: Robert I. Stevenson, B.J. Brabham

University of Richmond Law Review

Professor Robert I. Stevenson must retire from teaching after this academic year. Students and faculty here at the University of Richmond Law School are saddened by the prospect. Many have gone to him personally, urging him to stay on for just one more year (hoping, without doubt, to see that "one more year" stretch into many more years). All have come away disappointed. Bob Stevenson believes that mandatory retirement, at least in this profession, is a good thing. He has seen too many excellent teachers, judges, and the like, continue on the job long after their excellence has vanished. And …


Dedication: Robert I. Stevenson Jan 1981

Dedication: Robert I. Stevenson

University of Richmond Law Review

Robert I. Stevenson will retire from his position as Professor of Law at the University of Richmond School of Law at the end of the 1981-82 academic year. Mr. Stevenson joined the faculty of T.C. Williams in 1974 and since that time has shared his knowledge, his wit and his perspective with countless students who by chance or design enrolled in his courses. To acknowledge our deep appreciation for the contribution which Mr. Stevenson has made to the quality of legal education at T. C. Williams and to express our sense of loss at his impending departure, the Editorial Board …


Corporate Attorney-Client Privilege - New Emphasis On The Lawyer's Need To Know: Upjohn Co. V. United States, Michael J. Viscount Jr. Jan 1981

Corporate Attorney-Client Privilege - New Emphasis On The Lawyer's Need To Know: Upjohn Co. V. United States, Michael J. Viscount Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

In seeking the advice of legal counsel, the corporation may, out of necessity, communicate through its representatives confidential secrets about its conduct in business. As is the case with individuals, it is well settled that a corporation may avail itself of the evidentiary privilege which allows concealment of such confidential communications. This so-called attorney-client privilege is the oldest of the privileges for confidential communications known to the common law. However, its application in the corporate context has been quite unpredictable for the past twenty years.


A Tribute To J. Westwood Smithers, Robert R. Merhige Jr. Jan 1981

A Tribute To J. Westwood Smithers, Robert R. Merhige Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

The Editorial Board of the University of Richmond Law Review respectfully dedicates this issue to the memory of J. Westwood Smithers, 1909-1981, member of the Law Faculty for thirty years and the first editor of the University of Richmond Law Notes, from which the University of Richmond Law Review developed.


University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents Jan 1981

University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


Equity Insolvency And The New Model Business Corporation Act, Daniel T. Murphy Jan 1981

Equity Insolvency And The New Model Business Corporation Act, Daniel T. Murphy

University of Richmond Law Review

One consequence of the recent and far-reaching revisions to the financial provisions of the Model Business Corporation Act (hereafter the "Model Act") is to re-focus attention on the significance of the elusive concept of equity insolvency as it affects corporate distributions.


Discovery Of Penalties, W. Hamilton Bryson Jan 1981

Discovery Of Penalties, W. Hamilton Bryson

University of Richmond Law Review

It is a well-established and fundamental principle of justice that no one may be compelled to subject himself to punishments nor to give evidence leading to that result. Nemo tenetur prodere seipsum is an ancient maxim. It was written directly into the Virginia Declaration of Rights in 1776, which states that in all "criminal prosecutions" no one can "be compelled to give evidence against himself." This idea was also incorporated into the United States Constitution in 1791 through the fifth amendment.


A Critique Of Hodel V. Virginia Surface Mining And Reclamation Association, Timothy W. Mcafee Jan 1981

A Critique Of Hodel V. Virginia Surface Mining And Reclamation Association, Timothy W. Mcafee

University of Richmond Law Review

On January 3, 1980, the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia declared substantial portions of the Federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (hereinafter "the Surface Mining Act" or "the Act") to be unconstitutional in Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Association v. Andrus. Specifically, the district court found that section 515(d) and (e) of the Act were in contravention of the tenth amendment, that sections 515(d)-(e) and 522 of the Act constituted an unconstitutional taking of private property without just compensation in violation of the fifth amendment and that sections 518 and 521 of …


University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents Jan 1981

University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


A Re-Examination Of Sovereign Tort Immunity In Virginia, Edward W. Taylor Jan 1981

A Re-Examination Of Sovereign Tort Immunity In Virginia, Edward W. Taylor

University of Richmond Law Review

In a hair splitting decision on June 5, 1980, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled in James v. Jane, that attending physicians at the University of Virginia Hospital are not immune from tort liability but affirmed that the state, interns and residents of state hospitals, and employees of the state still enjoy tort immunity. The court made a distinction between the sovereign Commonwealth of Virginia and its employees, and a governmental agency created by the Commonwealth and its employees. However, apparently not all state employees are immune; and not all employees of state agencies are subject to tort liability.


Challenging Rezoning In Virginia, William F. Neely Jan 1981

Challenging Rezoning In Virginia, William F. Neely

University of Richmond Law Review

Zoning is an intrusion into our everyday lives, regulating a right basic to most Americans-the free use of their land. As municipalities increase their use of the zoning mechanism, more landowners will find the use of their lands restricted and in turn will seek legal counsel in order to challenge the restrictions. Presently, when faced with a rezoning question, a practitioner has to filter through the many treatises, articles and cases in an attempt to pull together Virginia law. It is the purpose of this comment to compile Virginia rezoning law in order to serve as a reference for the …


Rhode Island V. Innis: A Workable Definition Of "Interrogation"?, Deborah L. Fletcher Jan 1981

Rhode Island V. Innis: A Workable Definition Of "Interrogation"?, Deborah L. Fletcher

University of Richmond Law Review

In Rhode Island v. Innis, the Supreme Court addressed for the first time the issue of what constitutes interrogation under Miranda v. Arizona. Innis is a significant decision in the criminal procedure area not only because of the workable standard for determining "interrogation" which it sets forth, but also because it signals the Burger Court's decision not to overrule Mirandaor to further disparage its effectiveness. However, Innis by no means represents a return to the Warren Court's solicitous approach to a suspect's Miranda rights. The Burger Court still has not raised Miranda's protections and strictures to the status of constitutionally …


Discovery And The Privacy Act: Exemption (B)(11) To The Conditions Of Disclosure: What Qualifies As An "Order Of The Court"?, John W. Williams Jan 1981

Discovery And The Privacy Act: Exemption (B)(11) To The Conditions Of Disclosure: What Qualifies As An "Order Of The Court"?, John W. Williams

University of Richmond Law Review

On December 31, 1974, President Gerald Ford signed the landmark Privacy Act of 1974 into law. One of the key concepts of the Act is the principle of disclosure limitation, which limits the ability of the federal government to disclose the contents of per- sonal records in its possession. In the words of the Senate Governmental Operations Committee, this principle "is designed to pre- vent.., the wrongful disclosure and use of personal files held by Federal agencies."


Techniques Of Legal Drafting: A Survival Manual, Peter Nash Swisher Jan 1981

Techniques Of Legal Drafting: A Survival Manual, Peter Nash Swisher

University of Richmond Law Review

The charge that we lawyers cannot write plain English is often supported by the quality of our legal documents. Legal drafting has aspects of complexity and precision not found in the great bulk of writing with which pre-law students are familar. Yet the traditional apprentice method for training competent legal draftsmen has failed "either because the typical young lawyer has been apprenticed to the wrong master or because the law schools have been unable to provide enough competent ones." This lack of a proper emphasis on legal drafting skills in America is demonstrated by the fact that of the four …


The Business Purpose Test In Section 355 Distributions: Major Pitfalls For Close Corporation Planning, Brenda D. Crocker Jan 1981

The Business Purpose Test In Section 355 Distributions: Major Pitfalls For Close Corporation Planning, Brenda D. Crocker

University of Richmond Law Review

Since 1918, Congress has recognized the economic necessity of stimulating growth in the business sector by encouraging productive corporate divisions. The unhappy task of more than sixty years has been to draft a statute which maximizes flexibility while precluding tax avoidance abuses. Charting its way by piecemeal legislation, Congress appears to have intended tax-free treatment for stock distributions pursuant to corporate divisions motivated by reasonable business needs. Curiously, although Congress clearly has assumed that a valid business purpose must be the primary motivation for such transactions, it never has expressly addressed the matter by statute. Instead, it has devised numerous …


Non-Jury Trial Of Civil Litigation: Justifying A Complexity Exception To The Seventh Amendment, Barrett E. Pope Jan 1981

Non-Jury Trial Of Civil Litigation: Justifying A Complexity Exception To The Seventh Amendment, Barrett E. Pope

University of Richmond Law Review

The seventh amendment to the United States Constitution states that "[i]n Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved."' When Congress enacted the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the right to jury trial at common law remained undisturbed.


A Case For Jury Determination Of Search And Seizure Law, Ronald J. Bacigal Jan 1981

A Case For Jury Determination Of Search And Seizure Law, Ronald J. Bacigal

University of Richmond Law Review

In a criminal case the option to return a general verdict of acquittal invests the jury with the raw power to nullify many legal determinations, including the trial judge's ruling that a search is constitutional. While courts grudingly acknowledge the existence of an extra-legal jury nullification power, courts do not recognize any jury prerogative to determine the lawfulness of a search. The United States Supreme Court's discussion of the jury's role in interpreting and applying the fourth amendment consists of one terse statement that the legality of a search "is a question of fact and law for the court and …


Faithful Magistrates And Republican Lawyers: Creators Of Virginia's Legal Culture, 1680-1810, E. Lee Shepard Jan 1981

Faithful Magistrates And Republican Lawyers: Creators Of Virginia's Legal Culture, 1680-1810, E. Lee Shepard

University of Richmond Law Review

That well-known but inadequately understood institution, the county court, was brought to life and placed in clear perspective as an integral part of the life of colonists of every variety of status and calling nearly thirty years ago in Charles Sydnor's classic, albeit impressionistic, study, Gentlemen Freeholders: Political Practices in Washington's Virginia (1952). Sydnor proclaimed that in eighteenth-century Virginia planters, not lawyers, dominated the political scene and thus dispensed with the legal profession. Sydnor's domain was politics; his discussion centered on the "county oligarchies." In recent years scholars have recognized the pressing need for a deeper understanding of the operations …


Criminal Procedure And Criminal Law: Virginia Supreme Court Decisions During The 70'S, Michael J. Barbour, Thomas E. Carr, Sarah H. Finley, Jeannie L. Pilant Jan 1981

Criminal Procedure And Criminal Law: Virginia Supreme Court Decisions During The 70'S, Michael J. Barbour, Thomas E. Carr, Sarah H. Finley, Jeannie L. Pilant

University of Richmond Law Review

The purpose of this note is to examine the decisions of the Virginia Supreme Court during the period between 1970-1980 in the area of criminal procedure and substantive criminal law. Legislative changes will not be dealt with in depth except as they have affected these decisions. Because of space constraints, a complete review of all areas is impossible; therefore, review has been limited to those issues most likely to be of interest to the practicing attorney. The discussion will also attempt to establish the position of the Virginia Supreme Court on these matters in relation to the United States Supreme …


The Legislative Abrogation Of Interspousal Immunity In Virginia, Lisa Anderson-Lloyd Jan 1981

The Legislative Abrogation Of Interspousal Immunity In Virginia, Lisa Anderson-Lloyd

University of Richmond Law Review

Is a wife who hires someone to murder her husband liable in tort for the injuries he sustains in the murder attempt? The Virginia Supreme Court faced just this question in 1980 in Counts v. Counts. In light of the partial abrogation of the doctrine of interspousal immunity by the Virginia Supreme Court during the 1970's in wrongful death actions and inactions for damages in motor vehicle accident cases, a well reasoned prediction would have anticipated a further erosion of the doctrine. In Counts, however, the court disallowed the interspousal suit for an intentional tort, signaling that it had no …


University Of Richmond Law Review Index Jan 1981

University Of Richmond Law Review Index

University of Richmond Law Review

This is the Index for Volume XV.