Law Commons^™

Picking Up The Pieces Of The Gordian Knot: Towards A Sensible Merger Methodology, Bruce A. Antkowiak

ExpressO

This question of merger is one of the most perplexing that courts face in the criminal sentencing process. This article not only explores that question but proposes specific new methods a court may use to resolve this question in a way consonant with the Constitution and the intent of the legislature.

The article takes as its starting point a brilliant analysis of the Double Jeopardy doctrine set out by Professor Ann Poulin of Villanova Law School in an article entitled Double Jeopardy and Multiple Punishment: Cutting the Gordian Knot, 77 U. Colo. L. Rev. 595 (2006). Professor Poulin’s work demonstrates …

Constructing Class Action Reality, Debra Lyn Bassett

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Taking Judicial Notice Of Genocide? The Problematic Law And Policy Of The Karemera Decision, Ralph Mamiya

ExpressO

On June 16, 2006, the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda issued a decision in Prosecutor v. Karemera taking judicial notice of the fact that genocide occurred in Rwanda in 1994. This decision startled many court observers. While no internationally respected commentator would today question whether the Rwanda genocide took place, should such an event be judicially noticed without evidence? This paper examines that question, arguing that the ICTR Appeals Chamber’s expansive use of judicial notice in Karemera was both illogical and unwise. Genocide, whether as an historical fact or legal charge, fails to meet the “common …

Appellate Practice And Procedure, Roland F.L. Hall

Mercer Law Review

This Article surveys decisions addressing appellate law and procedure handed down by the Georgia appellate courts between June 1, 2005 and May 31, 2006. The cases discussed fall within three categories: (1) appellate jurisdiction; (2) preserving the record; and (3) miscellaneous cases of interest.

Trial Practice And Procedure, Bruce P. Brown, Jonathan R. Friedman, Michael R. Boorman, Benjamin J. Vinson

Mercer Law Review

This Article surveys noteworthy cases in the field of civil trial practice during the survey period1 by the Georgia Supreme Court and the Georgia Court of Appeals and relevant enactments by the Georgia General Assembly. This Article does not address the related and important topic of evidence, which is addressed in a separate survey. After describing relevant legislation, this Article surveys developments in trial practice in the order that they would be encountered in the typical case: pleadings, discovery, motions practice, juries and jury selection, statements and arguments of counsel, trial motions, jury instructions, and verdict forms.

Insurers, Illusions Of Judgment & Litigation, Chris Guthrie, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Insurers play a critical role in the civil justice system. By providing liability insurance to parties who would otherwise be untenable as defendants, insurers make litigation possible. Once litigation materializes, insurers provide representation, pay legal fees, and often play a central role in resolving disputes through settlement or adjudication. In this paper, we explore empirically how these key litigation players make important decisions in the litigation process, like evaluating a case, deciding whether to settle, and if so, on what terms. We find that insurers that have been shown to distort litigation decision making, appear to make decisions in a …

Insurers, Illusions Of Judgment & Litigation, Chris Guthrie, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski

Vanderbilt Law Review

Insurers play a critical role in the civil justice system. By providing liability insurance to parties who would otherwise be untenable as defendants, insurers make litigation possible. Once litigation materializes, insurers provide representation, pay legal fees, and often play a central role in resolving disputes through settlement or adjudication. In this paper, we explore empirically how these key litigation players make important decisions in the litigation process, like evaluating a case, deciding whether to settle, and if so, on what terms. We find that insurers, though not entirely immune to the effects of cognitive illusions that have been shown to …

Reassessing Charitable Immunity In Virginia, Carl Tobias

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Daubert And The Disappearing Jury Trial, Allan Kanner

ExpressO

Since being decided by the Supreme Court in 1993, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals has earned its place as one of the most misinterpreted and misapplied decisions in modern history. Meant to liberalize the standards for admissions of proof, the decision has had the opposite effect. The gatekeeper powers given to judges via Daubert, coupled with the internal and external incentives to prevent jury trials, has placed our entire civil justice system at risk.

Ley Federal Del Procedimiento Contencioso Administrativo., Bruno L. Costantini García

Bruno L. Costantini García

Ponencia sobre la Ley Federal del Procedimiento Contencioso Administrativo, impartida por Bruno L. Costantini García.

A Complete Property Right Amendment, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

The trend of the eminent domain reform and "Kelo plus" initiatives is toward a comprehensive Constitutional property right incorporating the elements of level of review, nature of government action, and extent of compensation. This article contains a draft amendment which reflects these concerns.

Airline Liability For Loss, Damage Or Delay Of Passenger Baggage, M. R. Franks

ExpressO

The article discusses remedies and methods of enforcing airline liability for loss, damage or delay of passenger baggage. The article includes a discussion of the law as it relates both to domestic flights and to international flights where passenger luggage is lost, damaged or delayed. The article includes a discussion of the Warsaw Convention as it relates to international flights and of the Federal Aviation Regulations applicable in the case of domestic flights.

Confidential Informants In Private Litigation: Balancing Interests In Anonymity And Disclosure, Ethan D. Wohl

ExpressO

Heightened pleading standards and limits on discovery in private securities fraud actions make confidential informants crucial in many cases. While courts have widely recognized the importance of confidential informants and the need to protect them from retaliation, they have not applied consistent standards for how informants must be identified in pleadings, and have failed to take into account substantial bodies of relevant caselaw when deciding whether to require that informants’ names be disclosed in discovery.

This article offers a framework for when and how confidential informants should be identified, taking into account the competing interests in anonymity and disclosure. It …

Chasing The Illusory Pot Of Gold At The End Of The Rainbow: Negligence And Strict Liability In Design Defect Litigation, Aaron D. Twerski

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

"Deport All The Students": Lessons Learned In An X-Treme Clinic, Stacy Caplow

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Water Forum 2006, Susan Kelly

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Half-Fairness Of Google's Plan To Make The World's Collection Of Books Searchable, Steven Hetcher

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Google's major new initiative is to undertake the task of digitizing the world's collection of books so as to make them searchable. The very idea is audacious, but what is more so is that Google plans to copy without first seeking the permission of the owners of these works. Google Print would make available what is, by conventional measures at least, the highest grade of information--books produced by millions of the world's leading scholars. This is in stark contrast to the inconsistent quality spectrum one encounters through other online sources such as peer-to-peer networks and blogs, where there currently exists …

Distinguishing Certification From Abstention In Diversity Cases: Postponement Versus Abdication Of The Duty To Exercise Jurisdiction, Deborah J. Challener

ExpressO

When a federal court grants an abstention-based dismissal in a diversity case, the court abdicates its strict duty to exercise its jurisdiction where that jurisdiction has been properly invoked. Thus, a federal court may not dismiss a case on abstention grounds unless it concludes that "exceptional circumstances" require the dismissal. When a federal court grants an abstention-based stay in a diversity case, however, the court does not violate its jurisdictional duty. According to the Supreme Court, an abstention-based stay is merely a postponement of the exercise of jurisdiction. Although the Court has characterized an abstention-based stay as a delay rather …

Herding Bullfrogs Towards A More Balanced Wheelbarrow: An Illustrative Recommendation For Federal Sentencing Post-Booker, Brian R. Gallini, Emily Q. Shults

ExpressO

The Article argues in favor of shifting the balance in federal sentencing toward a more indeterminate system. By exploring the post-Booker legal landscape at both the federal and state levels, the Article asserts that the judiciary's continued reliance on the “advisory" Guidelines has practically changed federal sentencing procedures very little in form or function. Accordingly, the Article proffers that, rather than insisting upon the Guidelines' immutability, federal sentencing would do well to reflect upon its own history, and the evolution of its state counterparts.

Enforcing Foreign Summary/Default Judgments: The Damoclean Sword Hanging Over Pro Se Canadian Corporate Defendants? Case Comment On U.S.A. V. Shield Development, Antonin I. Pribetic

ExpressO

Following the 2003 Supreme Court of Canada decision in Beals v. Saldanha, where the “real and substantial connection” test is otherwise met (i.e. consent-based jurisdiction, presence-based jurisdiction or assumed jurisdiction) the only available defences to a domestic defendant seeking to have a Canadian court refuse enforcement of a foreign judgment are fraud, public policy and natural justice. The 2005 Ontario decision in United States of America v. Shield Development Co., presents an opportunity to critically analyze the defence of natural justice through a juxtaposition of American and Canadian procedural law. The thesis is that procedural justice mandates that “form follow …

Searches & The Misunderstood History Of Suspicion & Probable Cause: Part One, Fabio Arcila

ExpressO

This article, the first of a two-part series, argues that during the Framers’ era many if not most judges believed they could issue search warrants without independently assessing the adequacy of probable cause, and that this view persisted even after the Fourth Amendment became effective. This argument challenges the leading originalist account of the Fourth Amendment, which Professor Thomas Davies published in the Michigan Law Review in 1999.

The focus in this first article is upon an analysis of the common law and how it reflected the Fourth Amendment’s restrictions. Learned treatises in particular, and to a lesser extent a …

Human Rights Begin At Home: A Policy Analysis Of Litigating International Human Rights In U.S. State Courts, Anna Maria Gabrielidis

Buffalo Human Rights Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Search Of The Transaction Or Occurrence: Counterclaims, Douglas D. Mcfarland

ExpressO

Tthe “transaction or occurrence” is the cornerstone of the federal joinder rules, including counterclaims, cross-claims, and joinder of parties. The rule that has produced by far the most reported decisions is Fed. R. Civ. P. 13(a), the compulsory counterclaim rule, so this article limits itself to counterclaims. The article looks at the history and intended meaning of the transaction or occurrence, proceeds to analyze and critique many court decisions on counterclaims, and proposes a new key phrase for the joinder rules.

Who Decides?: A Critical Look At Procedural Discretion, Robert G. Bone

ExpressO

Federal civil procedure today relies extensively on trial judge discretion to manage litigation, promote settlements, and otherwise tailor process to individual cases. Even those rules with decisional standards leave trial judges considerable interpretive freedom to make case-specific determinations. This Article criticizes these choices and recommends stricter rules. Many judges and procedure scholars applaud the discretionary approach, and the Advisory Committee seems content to draft vague rules that implement it. The assumption seems to be that trial judges have the expertise and experience to do a good job of tailoring procedures to the needs of particular cases. The assumption is wrong, …

Merits Stripping, Howard M. Wasserman

ExpressO

As the debate rages about the power and wisdom of Congress to “strip” federal courts of jurisdiction to adjudicate particular controversial federal issues, the discussion either ignores another means of constricting the power and influence of the courts. That is the distinct act of “merits stripping.” Merits stripping eliminates, limits, or diminishes enforceable substantive rights and the merits of claims brought to enforce those rights. Merits strips diminish the amount of real-world actors and conduct subject to legal duties and protected by legal rights. Merits striping limits who can sue whom over what conduct. Merits strips can target statutory or …

Jumping On The Bandwagon: How Canadian Lawyers Can & Should Get Involved In The Emerging Trend To Implement Therapeutic Jurisprudence Practices In Canadian Courts, Brooke Bloom

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Searches And The Misunderstood History Of Suspicion And Probable Cause: Part One, Fabio Arcila

ExpressO

This article, the first of a two-part series, argues that during the Framers’ era many if not most judges believed they could issue search warrants without independently assessing the adequacy of probable cause, and that this view persisted even after the Fourth Amendment became effective. This argument challenges the leading originalist account of the Fourth Amendment, which Professor Thomas Davies published in the Michigan Law Review in 1999.

The focus in this first article is upon an analysis of the common law and how it reflected the Fourth Amendment’s restrictions. Learned treatises in particular, and to a lesser extent a …

Executive Branch Regulation Of Defense Counsel And The Private Contract Limit On Prosecutor Bargaining, Darryl K. Brown

ExpressO

Criminal defendants’ right to counsel is regulated by courts, legislatures and, more recently and controversially, by the executive branch. Prosecutors recently have taken a more active role in affecting the power and effectiveness of defense counsel, especially privately retained counsel in white-collar crime cases. Under the Thompson Memo, prosecutors bargain to win waivers of attorney-client privilege and to convince corporate defendants not to pay the legal fees of corporate officers who face separate indictments. These tactics join longer-standing tools to weaken defense representation through forfeiture, Justice Department eavesdropping on attorney-client conversations of defendants in federal custody, and prosecutors’ power to …

Moot Court Teams 2006-2007, Kellie Casey Monk

Materials from All Student Organizations

No abstract provided.

Incentive Awards To Class Action Plaintiffs: An Empirical Study, Theodore Eisenberg, Geoffrey P. Miller

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Incentive awards to representative plaintiffs in class actions have been the focus of recent law reform efforts and have generated inconsistent case law. But little is known about such awards. This study of 374 opinions from 1993 to 2002 finds that awards were granted in about 28 percent of settled class actions. The rate of awards varied by case category as follows: consumer credit actions 59 percent, employment discrimination cases 46 percent, antitrust cases 35 percent, securities cases 24 percent (before the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 limited awards), and corporate and mass tort actions less than 10 …