Law Commons^™

Preservation Of Claims And Defenses Under The Texas Business And Commerce Code And Under The Texas Consumer Credit Code., James G. Boyle

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract Forthcoming.

Recent Cases, Cornelia H. Boozman, R. Preston Bolt, Jr., Kenneth L. Stewart

Vanderbilt Law Review

Administrative Law--Ripeness--Agency Head's Informal Opinion Letters Held Unripe for Review When No Substantial Hardship Placed on Parties

Cornelia H. Boozman

The basic premise of the ripeness doctrine is that judicial machinery should operate only on concrete problems that are present or imminent, not on problems that are abstract, hypothetical,or remote... The Supreme Court articulated a more definitive standard for determining ripeness in "Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner." Espousing what it considered to be the basic rationale of the ripeness doctrine, avoidance of premature adjudication of discretionary administrative policies, the Court established a procedure for evaluating the ripeness issue in challenges to …

School Desegregation, Class Suits, And The Vexing Problem Of Group Remedies, Keith Jurow

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Diversity Jurisdiction And Limited Partnerships, Scott M. Farnsworth

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Privity, Preclusion, And The Parent-Child Relationship, Kenneth W. Jennings

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Survey Of Develpoments In West Virginia Law: 1977, Joseph W. Bowman, Thomas Evans, Janet Archer Goodwin, Laura Jane Kelly, Kenneth E. Tawney

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Post-Judgment Garnishment Without Notice And A Hearing Is Constitutional, Robert L. Porter Jr.

Mercer Law Review

In Brown v. Liberty Loan Corp., the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that Florida's post-judgment garnishment statutes satisfy due process requirements even though they fail to provide the judgment debtor with notice and an opportunity for a hearing on his entitlement to a statutory wage exemption before wages are attached.

Practice And Procedure, R. Neal Batson, Ben F. Johnson Iii

Mercer Law Review

This article opened last year with a discussion of McGovern v. American Airlines, Inc. and the principle that it is the plaintiff's burden to allege and invoke federal jurisdiction. McGovern was undercut somewhat by the 1976 case of Skidmore v. Syntex Laboratories, Inc. Indeed, one dissenting judge argued that the Fifth Circuit was permitting jurisdiction even though the plaintiff had failed to make even a prima facie showing of essential jurisdictional facts. The plaintiff, a Texas citizen, brought a products-liability diversity action against one Delaware corporation and one Panamanian corporation. The plaintiff, even after substantial discovery, was unable to demonstrate …

Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1976

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Civil Procedure--Jurisdiction--The West Virginia Long-Arm Statute, John A. Rollins

West Virginia Law Review

In 1957 the West Virginia legislature enacted a statute which provides that in certain instances foreign corporations would be deemed to be doing business in this state for the purpose of service of process. In enacting this "long-arm" statute, West Virginia joined many other states in taking advantage of the United States Supreme Court's decisions that expanded the extent to which states could exercise personal jurisdiction over nonresidents within the limits of due process. However, upon comparing the jurisdiction afforded by the West Virginia statute to that exercised under other long-arm statutes, it becomes apparent that this state has taken …

Amendments May Relate Back To Validate Service Of Process, Michael G. Gray

Mercer Law Review

Leniston v. Bonfiglio is worthy of inspection not only because of the proposition for which the case stands but also because of the manner in which the Georgia Court of Appeals chose to convey this proposition to the reader. Mrs. Alice Bonfiglio filed her complaint in the State Court of DeKalb County for $200 in damages to her automobile, allegedly precipitated by the negligence of defendant, Mrs. Leniston. Service of process was effectuated by a deputy marshal's tacking the summons to the door' of Mrs. Leniston's most notorious place of abode in DeKalb County, pursuant to C.P.A. § 4(d)(6).1 Contending …

Party Not Otherwise A Federal-Court Defendant May Not Be A 'Pendent Party' In A § 1983 Claim, Gary D. Simpson

Mercer Law Review

In Aldinger v. Howard, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a party not already in federal court under a federal claim may not be brought into federal court under a state claim, even though the plaintiff's state claim has a "common nucleus of operative fact" with the plaintiff's federal claim against another party. This limitation on "pendant party" jurisdiction, however, was restricted to state claims asserted to be "pendent" to 42 U.S.C.A. § 19832 and its jurisdictional corollary, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1343(3).

Petitioner Aldinger had a civil-rights claim under § 1983 against Respondent Howard, the treasurer of Spokane County, …

Recent Cases, Sara P. Walsh, Don B. Cannada, Frances L. Adams, William T. Luedke, Iv

Vanderbilt Law Review

Civil Procedure - Appellate Jurisdiction - Orders Denying Disqualification of Counsel on Ethical Grounds Are Not Final Decisions Subject to Immediate Review Under 28 U.S.C. § 1291

Sara Porter Walsh

Petitioner,' an applicant for a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) broadcasting license, sought interlocutory review of a Commission order' denying a motion to disqualify the law firm that had represented competitor RKO for thirty years. Petitioner alleged that participation by the firm, which included an attorney who was chairman of the FCC while RKO's application was under consideration, constituted a violation of Canons Five and Nine' of the ABA Code of …

Federal Civil Rules In The Fourth Circuit.

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ii. Civil Procedure

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Erosion Of Erie In The Federal Courts: Is State Law Losing Ground?, David A. Thomas

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Civil Procedure-Title 8.01: Virginia's New Civil Procedure Act, Scott D. Anderson, Theodore I. Brenner

University of Richmond Law Review

On October 1, 1977, Title 8 of the Code of Virginia was repealed and Title 8.01 became effective. The revisers of Title 8 have produced an extensive, as well as comprehensive, change in the statutes which govern civil procedure in Virginia. Most of the provisions have been rewritten, deleted or moved to other titles. With several notable exceptions, civil procedure in Virginia will remain basically unchanged. Much of the revisers work leaves Title 8 substantively intact. The major changes will be discussed in a chapter by chapter analysis of Title 8.01 in Section II of this article.

The Demise Of The Ultimate Fact Rule In Indiana, Edward J. Liptak

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Re-Discovering Discovery: A Fresh Look At The Old Hound, 10 J. Marshall J. Of Prac. & Proc. 197 (1977), Terrence F. Kiely

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Time Of Discovery Rule And The Qualified Privilege Defense For Credit Reporting Agencies In Illinois After World Of Fashion V. Dun & (And) Bradstreet, Inc., 10 J. Marshall J. Of Prac. & Proc. 359 (1977), Paul Wangerin

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Balancing Almost Two Hundred Years Of Economic Policy Against Contemporary Due Process Standards - Mechanics' Liens In Maryland After Barry Properties, Kenneth B. Frank, George W. Mcmanus Jr.

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Sentencing Alternatives For Virginia General District Courts, Jose R. Davila Jr., Robert L. Mordhorst

University of Richmond Law Review

The endless parade of humanity that passes before the benches of Virginia's general district courts accused of minor offenses presents to those charged with deciding these cases one of the most challenging judicial tasks of our day. The challenge in addition to deciding guilt or innocence is also determining what to do with those judged guilty. Those decisions influence to one degree or another the direction of peoples lives for their own and society's good or ill. Most of the offenders appearing before these courts are young people, often first offenders. The behavior patterns of their lives are not yet …

Sniadach Through Di-Chem And Backwards: An Analysis Of Virginia's Attachment And Detinue Statute, B. J. Brabham

University of Richmond Law Review

Few cases in debtor-creditor relations have been discussed as much as Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp., Fuentes v. Shevin, Mitchell v. W. T. Grant Co., and North Georgia Finishing, Inc. v. Di-Chem, Inc. Despite the volume already written, however, the commentary appears destined to continue for some time to come. Thanks largely to this outpouring of attention, most lawyers and students are acutely aware of the fundamental issue involved in that line of cases, namely: is it constitutional to seize a debtor's property without notice and a hearing? Before Sniadach the answer of most lawyers and students even remotely conversant …

The Implied Private Cause Of Action And The Federal Aviation Act: A Practical Application Of Cort V. Ash, James D. Crawford, Deena Jo. Schneider

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Numbers Game - The Use And Misuse Of Statistics In Civil Rights Litigation, Marcy M. Hallock

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Chapters Of The Civil Jury, Doug Rendleman

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Aldinger V. Howard: At The Crossroads Of Pendent Party Jurisdiction And Section 1983 Limits On Suable "Persons", 11 J. Marshall J. Prac. & Proc. 231 (1977), Wallace J. Wolff

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Finality Of An Order Granting A Rule 60(B) Motion For Relief From Judgment: Some Footnotes To Gte Automatic Electric, Inc. V. Arc Industries, Inc., J. Patrick Browne

Cleveland State Law Review

Is an order granting a Rule 60(B) motion for relief from judgment a final order for the purpose of appeal? In GTE Automatic Electric, Inc. v. ARC Industries, Inc., the Ohio Supreme Court answered the question in the affirmative with respect to default judgments. However, because the court's answer contains some inherent ambiguities, because default judgments comprise only one type of judgment subject to a Rule 60(B) motion for relief from judgment, and because of the variety of relief that may be granted pursuant to such a motion, the question deserves further consideration. This article begins that consideration, examines some …

Learned Treatises In Illinois: Are We Witnessing The Birth Of A New Hearsay Exception?, Robert G. Spector

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.