Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Jurisdiction (19)
- Arbitration (9)
- Litigation (9)
- Federal jurisdiction (7)
- Arbitration contracts (6)
-
- Federalism (6)
- Judicial review (6)
- Dispute resolution (5)
- Aliens (4)
- International commercial arbitration (4)
- International law (4)
- Remedies (4)
- Antitrust (3)
- Arbitration agreements (3)
- Bankruptcy (3)
- Business (3)
- Commercial arbitration (3)
- Constitutional law (3)
- Courts (3)
- Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) (3)
- Government regulation (3)
- Human rights (3)
- Juvenile offenders (3)
- Legislation (3)
- Securities (3)
- Separation of powers (3)
- United States (3)
- United States Supreme Court (3)
- Vacatur (3)
- Abstention (2)
- Publication Year
Articles 1 - 30 of 81
Full-Text Articles in Law
The "Inherent Powers" Of Multidistrict Litigation Courts, Lynn A. Baker
The "Inherent Powers" Of Multidistrict Litigation Courts, Lynn A. Baker
Pepperdine Law Review
Mass tort multidistrict litigations (MDLs) involving thousands of claims present the judge with unique management issues. The MDL statute, in its scant two pages enacted in 1968, offers no guidance for the proper handling of these issues, and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure speak to these issues only very generally through Rules 16 and 42. Thus, MDL judges have often invoked their “inherent powers” as authority when they take certain actions with significant implications for the parties and their attorneys. Not surprisingly, several of these actions and their underlying justifications have been controversial: (a) appointing lead attorneys; (b) ordering …
The Supreme Court, Article Iii, And Jurisdiction Stuffing, James E. Pfander
The Supreme Court, Article Iii, And Jurisdiction Stuffing, James E. Pfander
Pepperdine Law Review
Reflecting on the state of the federal judiciary in the aftermath of the Biden Commission report and subsequent controversies, this Article identifies problems with the current operation of both the Supreme Court and the lower courts that make up the Article III judicial pyramid. Many federal issues have been assigned to non-Article III tribunals, courts poorly structured to offer the independent legal assessment that such Founders as James Wilson prized as they structured the federal judiciary. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court devotes growing attention to a slice of highly salient public law questions, including those presented on the shadow docket, thereby …
Federalism Limits On Non-Article Iii Adjudication, F. Andrew Hessick
Federalism Limits On Non-Article Iii Adjudication, F. Andrew Hessick
Pepperdine Law Review
Although Article III of the Constitution vests the federal judicial power in the Article III courts, the Supreme Court has created a patchwork of exceptions permitting non-Article III tribunals to adjudicate various disputes. In doing so, the Court has focused on the separation of powers, concluding that these non-Article III adjudications do not unduly infringe on the judicial power of the Article III courts. But separation of powers is not the only consideration relevant to the lawfulness of non-Article III adjudication. Article I adjudications also implicate federalism. Permitting Article I tribunals threatens the role of state courts by expanding federal …
“Drive-By” Jurisdiction: Congressional Oversight In Court, Daniel Epstein
“Drive-By” Jurisdiction: Congressional Oversight In Court, Daniel Epstein
Pepperdine Law Review
On July 9, 2020, in Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP and Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG, the Supreme Court held that the lower courts did not adequately consider the separation of powers concerns attendant to congressional subpoenas for presidential information. Given that the question presented in Mazars concerned whether Congress had a legitimate legislative purpose in subpoenaing the President’s personal records, the Supreme Court’s decision is anything but a model of clarity. The Court simultaneously opined that disputes “involving nonprivileged, private information” “do[ ] not implicate sensitive Executive Branch deliberations” while claiming “congressional subpoenas for the President’s information unavoidably pit …
Fight Or Flight: The Ninth Circuit's Advancement Of Textualism During An Era Of Intentionalism In United States V. Lozoya, Zachary Remijas
Fight Or Flight: The Ninth Circuit's Advancement Of Textualism During An Era Of Intentionalism In United States V. Lozoya, Zachary Remijas
Pepperdine Law Review
The modern complexities of global interaction and accessibility have recently forced some federal courts to reconsider standards for determining proper venue for criminal defendants who commit offenses while engaged in transportation, particularly those involving interstate commerce and crimes spanning multiple districts. These courts’ application of two adversarial schools of statutory interpretation—textualism and intentionalism—has driven conflict between textualist jurisdictions adhering to the plain meaning of established constitutional and statutory sources, and intentionalist jurisdictions refraining from the “creeping absurdity” of establishing venue for certain in-transit offenses under the literal meaning of such provisions. This Note endorses the sensibility and superiority of the …
The Need For A Central Panel Approach To Administrative Adjudication: Pros, Cons, And Selected Practices, Malcolm C. Rich, Alison C. Goldstein
The Need For A Central Panel Approach To Administrative Adjudication: Pros, Cons, And Selected Practices, Malcolm C. Rich, Alison C. Goldstein
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
The goal of this report is to document the growth of the central panel movement that has now emerged in a majority of states. This research is designed to provide data-informed recommendations to states and municipalities considering the adoption of a central panel system or the enlargement of the jurisdiction encompassed by an existing central panel as well as to states considering the adoption of a more final decision-making authority for their central panel ALJs. The work is also intended to inform the debate over whether the central panel approach is something that the federal government should consider. This research …
The Problem Of Purely Procedural Preemption Presented By The Federal Hear Act, William L. Charron
The Problem Of Purely Procedural Preemption Presented By The Federal Hear Act, William L. Charron
Pepperdine Law Review
The underlying purpose of the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016 (the HEAR Act), which is to return Nazi-looted artwork to victims or their families, is undeniably laudable. Restituting Nazi-looted artwork is and has been a moral objective of this country since the conclusion of World War II. It is equally clear that victims and their families can often face obstacles to gathering evidence from the war that would demonstrate Nazi theft in court. The HEAR Act strives to address these concerns by imposing a federal statute of limitations over all state law causes of action that would enable …
Is It Safe To Speak Up Now? Evaluating The Expansion Of Whistleblower Protection Act Jurisdiction, Gil Landau
Is It Safe To Speak Up Now? Evaluating The Expansion Of Whistleblower Protection Act Jurisdiction, Gil Landau
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
Whistleblowers have uncovered billions of dollars of fraud and severe national security threats. Nonetheless, for many years, federal employee whistleblowers faced retaliation and termination. Congress passed the Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) in an attempt to protect federal employee whistleblowers. But, the exclusive court for WPA appeals, the Federal Circuit, ignored Congressional intent and limited the WPA’s protections. In 2013, Congress responded by creating a five year experiment, known as “all circuit review,” to determine if WPA claims should also be appealable to the regional circuits. Over the past three years, all circuit review has led to modest changes in WPA …
To Waive Or Not To Waive? Filing Deadlines And Hearing Requests In Administrative Adjudications, Alice Booher Johnson
To Waive Or Not To Waive? Filing Deadlines And Hearing Requests In Administrative Adjudications, Alice Booher Johnson
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
In Part II of this Article, I provide an overview of subject matter jurisdiction in relation to filing timeframes. I review the distinction between original and appellate jurisdiction using Maryland case law and a sample survey of other state case law to provide background to the question of filing deadlines and hearing requests in administrative adjudications. In Part III of this Article, I elaborate upon Supreme Court precedent on administrative filing deadlines. In Part IV of this Article, I analyze the nature of filing deadlines for hearing requests before various state agencies, with an emphasis on Maryland’s scheme. The case …
Effects Of International Judgments Relating To Awards, Maxi Scherer
Effects Of International Judgments Relating To Awards, Maxi Scherer
Pepperdine Law Review
This Article looks at those judgments relating to international arbitral awards (award judgments) and, more precisely, at their extraterritorial effects. It analyzes whether an award judgment rendered in one jurisdiction has effects in other jurisdictions. For instance, if the award has been set aside6 in country A, does the set-aside judgment have effects on enforcement proceedings in country B? Similarly, if country C refuses to enforce an award on the basis that the tribunal has no jurisdiction, does this have a preclusive effect on enforcement proceedings pending in country D? These questions have been addressed in a number of recent …
Delaware Corporate Law Recognizes The Fundamental Validity Of The Forum Selection Bylaw: A Survey Of The Boilermakers Litigation, Zachary R. Cormier
Delaware Corporate Law Recognizes The Fundamental Validity Of The Forum Selection Bylaw: A Survey Of The Boilermakers Litigation, Zachary R. Cormier
The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law
Boilermakers Local 154 Retirement Fund v. Chevron Corp. represents a new and important chapter in the relationship between the forum selection clause and modern business relations. A forum selection clause is “[a] contractual provision in which the parties establish the place (such as the country, state, or type of court) for specified litigation between them.” Forum selection clauses have most often been analyzed by courts within contractual relationships between businesses, or a business and its customers. The Boilermakers case sets important precedent for forum selection in an equally fundamental business relationship--the corporation and its stockholders. This article will survey the …
City Of Arlington V. Fcc: Jurisdictional Or Nonjurisdictional, Where To Draw The Line?, Whitney Ruijuan Hao
City Of Arlington V. Fcc: Jurisdictional Or Nonjurisdictional, Where To Draw The Line?, Whitney Ruijuan Hao
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
The Competing Approaches To The Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act: A Fundamental Disagreement, Morgan Franz
The Competing Approaches To The Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act: A Fundamental Disagreement, Morgan Franz
Pepperdine Law Review
This Comment explores the history and reasoning behind a recent reexamination of the FTAIA in light of Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., examines both the propriety and the implications of the competing interpretations of the FTAIA, and argues that the resolution of the competing approaches is beyond the purview of the lower courts. Part II provides an overview of the extraterritorial reach of the Sherman Act leading up to the FTAIA, as well as the judicial treatment of the FTAIA prior to Arbaugh. Part III discusses the impact of Arbaugh and subsequent Supreme Court cases applying the “clearly states” …
The Doctrine Of Primary Jurisdiction: Was It Inverted?, Patrick Callahan
The Doctrine Of Primary Jurisdiction: Was It Inverted?, Patrick Callahan
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Application Of The Abstention Doctrine To Inverse Condemnation Actions In Federal Court , John T. Harris
Application Of The Abstention Doctrine To Inverse Condemnation Actions In Federal Court , John T. Harris
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Management's Right To Resort To Injunctive Relief And Self-Help In Order To Prevent Trespassory Union Activity: An Examination Of May Department Stores Co. V. Teamsters Union Local No. 743, Frank J. D'Oro Jr
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Federal Court Interpretation Of Attorney's Fees Provision Of Equal Access To Justice Act As It Applies To Hearings Of The United States Department Of Agriculture: United States Department Of Agriculture V. Lane, Tamara Carnovsky
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Deferential Review Of An Administrative Agency's Decision In Federal District Court: International College Of Surgeons V. City Of Chicago , Karen L. Vinzant
Deferential Review Of An Administrative Agency's Decision In Federal District Court: International College Of Surgeons V. City Of Chicago , Karen L. Vinzant
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
The Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act: Thirty Years Later And Of No Effect? Where Can The Unwed Father Turn?, Rebecca Miller
The Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act: Thirty Years Later And Of No Effect? Where Can The Unwed Father Turn?, Rebecca Miller
Pepperdine Law Review
In 1980, the federal government passed the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (PKPA), designed to prevent parents from attempting to “forum shop” to gain an advantage in custody disputes. A recent Utah Supreme Court decision held that jurisdiction challenges under the PKPA are waived if not raised in the lower court. This Article argues that this decision runs counter to the purpose behind the PKPA and sets a dangerous precedent. It calls for the Supreme Court to interpret the ambiguous provisions of the PKPA to resolve inconsistent rulings and protect the rights of unwed fathers.
Fernandez-Vargas V. Gonzales: An Examination Of Retroactivity And The Effect Of The Illegal Immigration Reform And Immigrant Responsibility Act, Brooke Hardin
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Not Quite A Civilian, Not Quite A Soldier: How Five Words Could Subject Civilian Contractors In Iraq And Afghanistan To Military Jurisdiction , Katherine Jackson
Not Quite A Civilian, Not Quite A Soldier: How Five Words Could Subject Civilian Contractors In Iraq And Afghanistan To Military Jurisdiction , Katherine Jackson
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
A Muddy Decision - The High Court Fails To Define The Corps' Wetland Jurisdiction In Rapanos V. United States, Jill Lambird
A Muddy Decision - The High Court Fails To Define The Corps' Wetland Jurisdiction In Rapanos V. United States, Jill Lambird
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
The Supreme Court's Take On Immigration In Nken V. Holder: Reaffirming A Traditional Standard That Affords Courts More Time And Flexibility To Decide Immigration Appeals Before Deporting Aliens, Elizaveta Kabanova
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
California And Uncle Sam's Tug-Of-War Over Mary Jane Is Really Harshing The Mellow, Daniel Mortensen
California And Uncle Sam's Tug-Of-War Over Mary Jane Is Really Harshing The Mellow, Daniel Mortensen
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Trespassory Union Picketing On Private Property: Sears, Roebuck And Co. V. San Diego County District Council Of Carpenters - Bringing State Law To "No-Man's Land"?, Donald S. Jakubowski, Marni E. Byrum
Trespassory Union Picketing On Private Property: Sears, Roebuck And Co. V. San Diego County District Council Of Carpenters - Bringing State Law To "No-Man's Land"?, Donald S. Jakubowski, Marni E. Byrum
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Mexican-American Penal Sentences Treaty: A Run-On Sentence, Gary Gray
The Mexican-American Penal Sentences Treaty: A Run-On Sentence, Gary Gray
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Compendium Of Major California Juvenile Law Decisions With Brief Analyses, 1979, Michael T. Lubinski, Robert M. Triplett
A Compendium Of Major California Juvenile Law Decisions With Brief Analyses, 1979, Michael T. Lubinski, Robert M. Triplett
Pepperdine Law Review
Society has been plagued with the problem of whether the police, the courts and the correction agencies are to administer juveniles for their protection and treatment, or for their punishment. To facilitate a better understanding of juvenile administration the authors have analyzed the California juvenile law cases for the year 1979. The article consists of six major area of interest; parent-child custody, sentencing, procedure, jurisdiction, evidentiary and constitutional which will be used to highlight some of the more significant decisions in the past year, thus enabling the reader to assess changes occurring in the juvenile system.
Status Offenders Should Be Removed From The Juvenile Court , Luke Quinn, Peter M. Hutchison
Status Offenders Should Be Removed From The Juvenile Court , Luke Quinn, Peter M. Hutchison
Pepperdine Law Review
Inadequate financial resources and overcrowded juvenile placement facilities have frequently been cited as grounds for the abrogation of the juvenile court's practice of retaining jurisdiction over status offenders. In this article, Judge Quinn suggests the existence of even more compelling reasons which support diversion of status offenders to programs better suited to their particular needs. The author contends that the juvenile court's jurisdiction should be confined to matters of fact-finding and adjudication, rather than intruding into areas within the domain of the parents, and into areas in which the court lacks the necessary expertise. It is argued that diversion of …
A Rationale For The Abolition Of The Juvenile Court's Power To Waive Jurisdiction , John Gasper, Daniel Katkin
A Rationale For The Abolition Of The Juvenile Court's Power To Waive Jurisdiction , John Gasper, Daniel Katkin
Pepperdine Law Review
The juvenile court's power to waive jurisdiction which entails the transfer of juvenile offenders to adult courts presents a topic of longstanding controversy. It's rationale, one of protection of the public, has been labeled by the authors as untenable. Moreover, it is asserted that waiver of jurisdiction in such cases contravenes the very cornerstone of the juvenile court process--the doctrine of parens patriae. Three methods of transfer are seen to exist--legislative, prosecutorial, and judicial. Focusing on the latter, the authors posit an argument advocating the abrogation of the concept of waiver. Justification for this proposition is seen to flow from …
The Invalidation Of Mandatory Cable Access Regulations: Fcc V. Midwest Video Corp., Robert L. Clarkson
The Invalidation Of Mandatory Cable Access Regulations: Fcc V. Midwest Video Corp., Robert L. Clarkson
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.