Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law, Justice Robert F. Utter
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law, Justice Robert F. Utter
Seattle University Law Review
This Survey is designed to assist lawyers and judges who must argue and resolve search and seizure issues in Washington State. The Survey summarizes the controlling state and federal cases on search and seizure law and uses as an additional reference W. LAFAVE, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment (1978). Washington courts are likely to analyze future search and seizure issues under both the fourth amendment and Washington Constitution article I, section 7. The difference in wording between the two provisions is substantial, suggesting different degrees or types of privacy protection. This Survey summarizes the predominant treatment …
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Review Of State Eminent Domain Legislation: Hawaii Housing Authority V. Midkiff, Stuart P. Kastner
Constitutional Review Of State Eminent Domain Legislation: Hawaii Housing Authority V. Midkiff, Stuart P. Kastner
Seattle University Law Review
The State of Hawaii has a unique land ownership problem directly affecting many of the state's homeowners: a handful of people own a large percentage of the land available for residential housing." Consequently, a significant proportion of homeowners rent, under long-term leases, the land on which their homes are built. In 1967 the Hawaii legislature took action to break up this concentration of ownership by enacting the Land Reform Act. The legislature declared that such ownership was a threat to the health, safety, and welfare of Hawaii's citizens because of its significant contribution to the spiraling inflation of land values. …
Foreword: Reliance On State Constitutions—Beyond The "New Federalism", Ronald K.L. Collins
Foreword: Reliance On State Constitutions—Beyond The "New Federalism", Ronald K.L. Collins
Seattle University Law Review
The reader will find in what follows in this symposium on the Washington Constitution a splendid sampling of where we have been and where we may be going with the "new federalism." The articles evidence a genuine and scholarly regard for the state constitution as a legal document worthy of independent textual, historical, and doctrinal analysis. In certain ways the University of Puget Sound Law Review symposium itself represents something of a turning point in the history of academic commentary on the "new federalism."
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Tightening The Reigns On Pendent And Ancillary Jurisdiction, David Lawyer
Tightening The Reigns On Pendent And Ancillary Jurisdiction, David Lawyer
Seattle University Law Review
Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. Article III, section 2 of the United States Constitution makes this principle clear by the statement that "judicial Power shall extend to all Cases . . arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties . . . and . . . to all controversies . . . between Citizens of different States . . ."' One might argue that "judicial power" under Article III is not the same thing as jurisdiction. But the exercise of jurisdiction in situations in which a federal court does not have judicial power would …
Herskovits V. Group Health Cooperative: Negligent Creation Of A Substantial Risk Of Injury Is A Compensable Harm, Warner Miller
Herskovits V. Group Health Cooperative: Negligent Creation Of A Substantial Risk Of Injury Is A Compensable Harm, Warner Miller
Seattle University Law Review
This Note commends the Herskovits court for recognizing the loss of-a-chance claim as a legitimate cause of action. Chance interests are worthy of the protection of tort law. We can be statistically certain that the destruction of chance interests in survival results in actual losses. The burden of such losses should not fall exclusively on the victim, particularly when the interfering conduct of the wrongdoer has deprived the individual victim of the ability to know and prove with certainty the value of the lost chance. The burden of the loss can be shifted in an equitable manner to the negligent …