Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Law
Who Has Standing To Sue The President Over Allegedly Unconstitutional Emoluments?, Matthew I. Hall
Who Has Standing To Sue The President Over Allegedly Unconstitutional Emoluments?, Matthew I. Hall
Scholarly Works
Three pending lawsuits challenge President Trump's practice of accepting payments and other benefits from foreign governments through his businesses as violative of the Foreign Emoluments Clause. They also allege that the President's practice of accepting payments and benefits from state or federal governmental units violates the Domestic Emoluments Clause. These actions raise interesting questions about the meaning of two little-discussed provisions of the Constitution. But before reaching the merits the courts will first have to grapple with issues of justiciability - in particular, with the question whether plaintiffs have "standing" to bring their claims in federal court. This article explains …
Financiers As Monitors In Aggregate Litigation, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch
Financiers As Monitors In Aggregate Litigation, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch
Scholarly Works
This Article identifies a market-based solution for monitoring large-scale litigation proceeding outside of Rule 23’s safeguards. Although class actions dominate the scholarly discussion of mass litigation, the ever increasing restrictions on certifying a class mean that plaintiffs’ lawyers routinely rely on aggregate, multidistrict litigation to seek redress for group-wide harms. Despite sharing key features with its class action counterpart—such as attenuated attorney-client relationships, attorneyclient conflicts of interest, and high agency costs—no monitor exists in aggregate litigation. Informal group litigation not only lacks Rule 23’s judicial protections against attorney overreaching and self-dealing, but plaintiff’s themselves cannot adequately supervise their attorneys’ behavior. …
Tending To Potted Plants: The Professional Identity Vacuum In Garcetti V. Ceballos, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Tending To Potted Plants: The Professional Identity Vacuum In Garcetti V. Ceballos, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
The Relationship Between Defense Counsel, Policyholders, And Insurers: Nevada Rides Yellow Cab Toward "Two-Client" Model Of Tripartite Relationship. Are Cumis Counsel And Malpractice Claims By Insurers Next?, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
It happens constantly in civil litigation. An insurance company hires a lawyer to defend its policyholder from a third party’s claim of injury. But just who is the lawyer’s “client?” Is it the policyholder who is the named defendant in the case and is “represented” in court proceedings? Or is it the insurer who, in most cases, selected the attorney, pays the attorney, supervises the litigation, and has (by the terms of the liability insurance policy) the right to settle the case, even over the objections of the policyholder? Ordinarily, the liability insurer has both the duty to defend a …
Lawyer Professional Responsibility In Litigation, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Lawyer Professional Responsibility In Litigation, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
A perennially-vexing litigation issue concerns the limits of permissible attorney argument. More than a few lawyers have been tripped up by the occasional fuzziness of the line between aggressive advocacy and improper appeals to passion or prejudice. See Craig Lee Montz, Why Lawyers Continue to Cross the Line in Closing Argument: An Examination of Federal and State Cases, 28 Ohio N.U. L. Rev. 67 (2001-2002)(problem of violations results from lack of uniformity and clarity of ground rules as well as errors of counsel). In Cohen v. Lioce, 149 P.3d 916 (Nev. 2006) the Nevada Supreme Court both provided significant guidance …
Racial Discrimination In Jury Selection: Professional Misconduct, Not Legitimate Advocacy, Lonnie T. Brown, Jr.
Racial Discrimination In Jury Selection: Professional Misconduct, Not Legitimate Advocacy, Lonnie T. Brown, Jr.
Scholarly Works
This Article examines the paradox between the adversary and disciplinary systems' outward condemnation of discrimination in jury selection and their apparent simultaneous inward acceptance of such conduct as legitimate advocacy.
Ending Illegitimate Advocacy: Reinvigorating Rule 11 Through Enhancement Of The Ethical Duty To Report, Lonnie T. Brown, Jr.
Ending Illegitimate Advocacy: Reinvigorating Rule 11 Through Enhancement Of The Ethical Duty To Report, Lonnie T. Brown, Jr.
Scholarly Works
This article seeks to draw attention to certain ethical misconduct of litigators that is routinely accepted, tolerated, or ignored by the legal profession. Though there are other examples, the author focuses on conduct prohibited by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. In particular, the author concentrates on that rule's so-called “safe harbor” provision, which he argues serves to insulate, and possibly encourage, illegitimate advocacy in the form of the assertion and maintenance of frivolous claims, defenses, or other contentions ironically, the very conduct that the rule was ostensibly intended to deter. Regardless of the frequency of this sort of misbehavior, …
International Judicial Assistance, Christopher L. Blakesley
International Judicial Assistance, Christopher L. Blakesley
Scholarly Works
The general or even specialized practitioner faces serious difficulties as the world shrinks and the practice of law frequently transcends international boundaries. In the civil and commercial arena, issues of discovery and service of documents abroad, others relating to judicial assistance from foreign courts, available to American courts or individual litigants, and assistance available from American courts for foreign governments and individual litigants, can be mindboggling. In an age where transnational litigation (that is, domestic litigation that touches upon one or more foreign jurisdictions) is rapidly increasing, counsel could be guilty of malpractice if counsel takes action abroad that proves …
Rehnquist, Recusal, And Reform, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Rehnquist, Recusal, And Reform, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
In September 1986, the Senate confirmed William H. Rehnquist as Chief Justice of the United States by a vote of 66 to 33, an unusually close vote for a successful Supreme Court nominee. Although Justice Rehnquist’s elevation from Associate to Chief Justice engendered substantial criticism because of his judicial philosophy, past political activity, and possible views on race relations, the most serious threat to his nomination arose from his decision fifteen years earlier to sit and cast the deciding vote in a Supreme Court case in which many questioned both his impartiality and his candor. That Justice Rehnquist's role in …