Law Commons^™

Judicial Federalism And The Appropriate Role Of The State Supreme Courts: A 20-Year (2000–2020) Study Of These Courts’ Interest Evaluations Of The Fruits And The Attenuation Doctrines, Dannye R. Holley Mr.

St. Mary's Law Journal

The current composition of the United States Supreme Court increases the probability that the Court will be more likely to side with the government with respect to identifying, evaluating, and reconciling the interest of the government versus those of the people when issues of “policing” reach the high court. This opens the door for state supreme court to independently assess individually and collectively these seemingly competing interests and potentially provide greater protections to the interest of the people.

This Article is a twenty-year study of dozens of state supreme court decisions made during the period of 2000–2020. The decisions focused …

Shifting The Burden Of Proving Self-Defense - With Analysis Of Related Ohio Law, Randy R. Koenders

Akron Law Review

Senate Bill Number 42 was introduced into the Ohio General Assembly on February 1, 1977. The bill provides that while the burden of proof for all elements of the criminal offense with which an individual is charged rests upon the prosecution, the burden of proof for affirmative defenses rests upon the defendant, and he must prove his affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence. Because the bill raises serious questions concerning placing the burden of persuasion with respect to affirmative defenses generally, and self-defense in particular, on the defendant, a study of the law and policy involved in shifting …

Shifting The Burden Of Proof On Causation In Legal Malpractice Actions., Jeffrie D. Boysen

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

Legal malpractice suits, like any negligence claim, require the plaintiff to meet all of the elements of the malpractice claim. Texas malpractice claims are based on professional negligence. In Texas, the elements a plaintiff must prove in a legal malpractice claim are: "(1) the attorney owed the plaintiff a duty; (2) the attorney breached that duty; (3) the breach proximately caused the plaintiffs injuries; and (4) damages occurred." Most jurisdictions, including Texas, place the burden on the plaintiff to meet all elements of the claim, including causation. However, a significant minority of jurisdictions allow the burden to shift to the …

Presumed Guilty Until Proven Innocent: The Burden Of Proof In Wrongful Conviction Claims Under State Compensation Statutes, Daniel S. Kahn

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Despite significant efforts to uncover and prevent wrongful convictions, little attention has been paid to the compensation of wrongfully convicted individuals once they are released from prison. State compensation statutes offer the best path to redress because they do not require the claimant to prove that the state was at fault for the wrongful conviction and because they are not susceptible to the same political influences as other methods of compensation. However, even under compensation statutes, too many meritorious claims are dismissed, settled for far too little, or never brought in the first place. After examining the current statutory framework, …

Ascertaining The Burden Of Proof For An Award For Punitive Damages In New York? Consult Your Local Appellate Division, Leon D. Lazer, John R. Higgitt

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Slides: Adapting Western Water Policy For Resilience Under Climate Change, Bonnie G. Colby

Shifting Baselines and New Meridians: Water, Resources, Landscapes, and the Transformation of the American West (Summer Conference, June 4-6)

Presenter: Dr. Bonnie G. Colby, Professor of Resource Economics & Hydrology, University of Arizona Department of Agriculture & Resource Economics

22 slides

Slides: The Future Public Law Of Private Ecosystems, J. B. Ruhl

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

Presenter: J.B. Ruhl, Florida State University Law School

18 slides

The Supreme Court's Land Use Decisions, Hon. Leon D. Lazer

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Employment Discrimination: Recent Developments In The Supreme Court, Eileen Kaufman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Legal Framework For Aquifer Issues, Douglas L. Grant

Uncovering the Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology, and Policy in the 1990s (Summer Conference, June 15-17)

20 pages.

Contains references.

Gender Based Peremptory Challenges And The New York State Constitution, Frederick T. Kelsey

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confrontation Clause

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Determining A Standard For Housing Discrimination Under Title Viii, Richard C. Cahn

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Instructing The Jury Upon Presumptions In Civil Cases: Comparing Federal Rule 301 With Uniform Rule 301, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

A Radical Restatement Of The Law Of Seller's Damages: Michigan Results Compared, Robert J. Harris

Michigan Law Review

Conventional doctrine does not address itself directly to the choice among valuation techniques, although the various parochial damage formulae give some clues. Underlying this series of articles is an assumption that the doctrine makes more sense when restated in valuation terms. These articles involve an effort to restate in such terms one sector of expectation damage law-the part that governs cases in which plaintiff is a "seller."

Local Government Law -- 1961 Tennessee Survey, Eugene Puett

Vanderbilt Law Review

Change of Boundaries.--Incorporated cities and towns continued to use the authority in the annexation statute to annex by ordinance,'and the courts were presented with several questions of interpretation of the statute not heretofore answered.

Discretion To Annex by Ordinance--The question in Central Soya Co. v. City of Chattanooga was whether or not a municipality when petitioned by "interested persons" must propose extension of its corporate limits by the referendum method.

Burden of Proof in Annexation--Since the action of the municipality is by ordinance, the suit to contest the validity of an annexation ordinance is in the nature of a quo …

Constitutional Law-Due Process-Burden Of Proving Insanity As Defense To Crime, Lois H. Hambro S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Defendant was convicted of first degree murder after having pleaded insanity as a defense to the charge. He appealed to the Supreme Court of Oregon, alleging that the Oregon statute, which required an accused pleading insanity to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, violated the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it placed on him the burden of proving his inability to premeditate and intend the criminal act. The defendant relied in part on the fact that Oregon is the only state requiring insanity to be proved ''beyond a reasonable doubt," while other states require at most that …