Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Civil Rights Act; Title VII; Employment Discrimination; McDonnell; Douglas; Ortiz; Nassar; evidence; evidentiary standard; retaliation claim; burden of proof; standard; but for; causation; jurisprudence; Seventh Circuit; employee (1)
- Insider trading; the Supreme Court; insiders; tip; tipper; tippee; securities; the Securities and Exchange Commission; SEC; inside information; access; Blackmun; Marshall; misappropriation theory; Chiarella; fair access; fairness; disclosure; Dirks; personal benefit; duty; unfairness; unfair; invest (1)
- Lautenberg Amendment; Gun Control Act; domestic violence; domestic abuse; firearm; gun; Voisine v. United States; United States v. Castleman; Armed Career Criminal Act; ACCA; mens rea; reckless; misdemeanor; felony (1)
- MCDV (1)
- Misdemeanor conviction of domestic violence (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Context Of Violence: The Lautenberg Amendment & Interpretive Issues In The Gun Control Act, Rachel B. Polan
The Context Of Violence: The Lautenberg Amendment & Interpretive Issues In The Gun Control Act, Rachel B. Polan
Brooklyn Law Review
Few areas of the law are as hotly debated as gun control, or as universally condemned as domestic violence – and the Supreme Court’s decisions on the Lautenberg Amendment address both. An amendment to the Gun Control Act, it prohibits persons convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence from owning a firearm. The amendment qualifies a predicate conviction as one that has a “force clause” as an element. In particular, while looking at the force in domestic violence, the Supreme Court has acknowledged that one must also look to context: a “squeeze of an arm” of an intimate partner …
Essay: Insiders, Outsiders, & Fair Access: Identifying Culpable Insider Trading, Jonathan D. Glater
Essay: Insiders, Outsiders, & Fair Access: Identifying Culpable Insider Trading, Jonathan D. Glater
Brooklyn Law Review
The Supreme Court’s insider trading doctrine has become increasingly convoluted as each effort to cope with novel fact patterns results in a new rule not tethered to principled understanding of the nature of the wrong committed. That this is not a terribly controversial claim is evidence of how far the Court’s jurisprudence has drifted. This essay proposes that the early error was abandonment of concern for third parties who trade on exchanges but who do not enjoy legal access to information possessed by insiders or tippees who receive information from insiders. The Court’s error, the essay contends, rests on a …
Patent Transfer And The Bundle Of Rights, Andrew C. Michaels
Patent Transfer And The Bundle Of Rights, Andrew C. Michaels
Brooklyn Law Review
When patents subject to a license agreement are transferred, to what extent do the benefits and burdens of the license agreement run with the patent? Courts have stated that those aspects of the agreement relating to “actual use” of the patent or invention are encumbrances running with the transferred patent. But this doctrinal test is not consistently applied and is not up to the task of clearly and consistently delineating the extent to which patent license agreements run with transferred patents. Conceptualizing the patent as a bundle of Hohfeldian Rights to exclude, this article proposes a more coherent framework for …
Fleeing The Rat’S Nest: Title Vii Jurisprudence After Ortiz V. Werner Enterprises, Inc., Zachary J. Strongin
Fleeing The Rat’S Nest: Title Vii Jurisprudence After Ortiz V. Werner Enterprises, Inc., Zachary J. Strongin
Brooklyn Law Review
In 2016, the Seventh Circuit issued an opinion that may be a harbinger for an important shift in the federal judiciary’s long-standing employment discrimination jurisprudence. In Ortiz v. Werner Enterprises, Judge Easterbrook reiterated the frustration with the existing “rat’s nest” of tests and standards used in Title VII discrimination and retaliation claims. The note contains two overarching arguments. First, the Supreme Court’s employment discrimination and “rat’s nest” of tests and standards has led to an untenable situation in which federal district courts apply different standards at different stages of litigations. This in turn has caused confusion amongst the various federal …