Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

Can Speech Act Theory Save Notice Pleading?, Susan E. Provenzano Jul 2021

Can Speech Act Theory Save Notice Pleading?, Susan E. Provenzano

Indiana Law Journal

Countless scholars have debated—and lower courts have attempted to apply—the plausibility pleading regime that the Supreme Court introduced in Twombly and Iqbal. Iqbal took Twombly’s requirement that a complaint plead plausibly and turned it into a two-step test. Under that test, the life or death of a lawsuit rests on the distinction between “well-pleaded” and “conclusory” allegations. Only the former are assumed true on a motion to dismiss. Seven decades of pleading precedent had taken a sensible, if unstable, approach to the truth assumption, making a single cut between factual contentions (assumed true) and legal conclusions (ignored). But Iqbal redrew …


The District Of South Carolina's Approach To Post-Removal Damage Stipulations: The Need For One Less "Controversy" In The Amount-In-Controversy Analysis, Samuel C. Williams Jul 2021

The District Of South Carolina's Approach To Post-Removal Damage Stipulations: The Need For One Less "Controversy" In The Amount-In-Controversy Analysis, Samuel C. Williams

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.


Justification Of The Legitimate Texts And The Issues Related To It, Ahmed Muhammad Al-Yamani Mar 2021

Justification Of The Legitimate Texts And The Issues Related To It, Ahmed Muhammad Al-Yamani

UAEU Law Journal

Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, benediction and peace be upon the noblest of Prophets and Messengers, our Master, Mohammad, his Kinsfolk and companions all.

This is an abstract of a research paper titled: (Justification of Religious Texts and the Fundamental Issues Associated with Such Justification)

This research paper consists of an introduction in which I have explained the significance of the study, the research plan, the reason for choosing the topic and the method I have followed in the study.

The study itself is composed of four themes: the first one: studying the topic and citing the …


Authenticity Of The Jurisprudential Rule: A Comparative Study, Ayman Abdel Hamid Al-Badarin Jan 2021

Authenticity Of The Jurisprudential Rule: A Comparative Study, Ayman Abdel Hamid Al-Badarin

UAEU Law Journal

This research is about the accompany of intention principles in Islamic Sharia according to jurisprudence and basis. This will be through the source of prophetic rule that actions are ruled by what we meant to accomplish through them. Therefore, I have explained the meaning of the principle, its evidences, its importance. Its parts or sections, and the estimated act in the saying ~ actions depend on intentions ~. Also, why intention is importantly considered, its location, and ruling on pronunciation principle. I have discussed the intention as a basis and as a condition, its time. The condition of the principle …


Assertion And Hearsay, Richard Lloret Jan 2021

Assertion And Hearsay, Richard Lloret

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

This article explores the characteristics and functions of assertion and considers how the term influences the definition of hearsay under Federal Rule of Evidence 801. Rule 801(a) defines hearsay by limiting it to words and conduct intended as an assertion, but the rule does not define the term assertion. Courts and legal scholars have focused relatively little attention on the nature and definition of assertion. That is unfortunate, because assertion is a robust concept that has been the subject of intense philosophic study over recent decades. Assertion is not a mere cypher standing in for whatever speech or conduct one …


Rock And Hard Place Arguments, Jareb Gleckel, Grace Brosofsky Jan 2021

Rock And Hard Place Arguments, Jareb Gleckel, Grace Brosofsky

Seattle University Law Review

This Article explores what we coin “rock and hard place” (RHP) arguments in the law, and it aims to motivate mission-driven plaintiffs to seek out such arguments in their cases. The RHP argument structure helps plaintiffs win cases even when the court views that outcome as unfavorable.

We begin by dissecting RHP dilemmas that have long existed in the American legal system. As Part I reveals, prosecutors and law enforcement officials have often taken advantage of RHP dilemmas and used them as a tool to persuade criminal defendants to forfeit their constitutional rights, confess, or give up the chance to …