Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Craig v. Boren (1)
- Dezendorf v. Humphreys (1)
- Erie Railroad v. Tompkins (1)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1)
- Frontiero v. Richardson (1)
-
- God v. Hurt (1)
- Hanson v. Denckla (1)
- Harris v. Balk (1)
- Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie Des Bauxites De Guinee (1)
- International Shoe Co. v. Washington (1)
- Jacobs v. Meade (1)
- Klaxon Company v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co (1)
- Mississippi Publishing Corp. v. Murphree (1)
- Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan (1)
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co (1)
- Orr v. Orr (1)
- Oxford First Corp. v. PNC Liquidating Corp (1)
- Pennoyer v. Neff (1)
- Rush v. Sarchuck (1)
- Schilling v. Bedford County Memorial Hospital (1)
- Shaffer v. Heitner (1)
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Federal Court Across The Street: Constitutional Limits On Federal Court Assertions Of Personal Jurisdiction, Pamela J. Stephens
The Federal Court Across The Street: Constitutional Limits On Federal Court Assertions Of Personal Jurisdiction, Pamela J. Stephens
University of Richmond Law Review
Twenty years ago, in a clear break with accepted theory, it was suggested that there were certain constitutional limitations on a federal court's authority to exercise personal jurisdiction. Such a departure from the traditional view might be expected to prompt an extensive examination of that issue by commentators. However, while assertions of personal jurisdiction by state courts have been the subject of intense scrutiny and ongoing constitutional refinements, this has not been the case regarding assertions of personal jurisdiction by federal courts. Generally, federal district courts sitting in diversity cases must look to personal jurisdiction limitations inherent in the state …
The Constitutionality Of The Feme Sole Estate And The Virginia Supreme Court's Creation Of An 'Homme Sole' Estate In Jacobs V. Meade, Maria Dill
University of Richmond Law Review
On April 27, 1984, the Virginia Supreme Court, in Jacobs v. Meade, was confronted with a constitutional challenge in the sensitive area of gender-based classifications. The object of the assault was the separate equitable estate, or feme sole estate. Historically, the feme sole estate was a method of holding property available exclusively to women. In Jacobs v. Meade, it was contended that since a man possessed no corresponding right to create a separate equitable estate, the feme sole estate was constitutionally defective on equal protection grounds.