Law Commons^™

Duets, Not Solos: The Mclachlin Court's Co-Authorship Legacy, Peter Mccormick

Dalhousie Law Journal

This article explores the recentphenomenon of the formal co-authorship of Supreme Court decisions. It begins with a short history of the practice, primarily in the closing years of the Lamer Court but expanding steadily under McLachlin. A closer investigation reveals two critically important dimensions: first, the practice is skewed toward the Court's more important decisions (measured in terms of subject matter legal complexity, interveners, and subsequent citation); and second, its diffusion across the Court's membership refutes the possibility that it simply reinforces persisting cleavages. This new practice represents a more overtly collegial format directed to the Court's more significant decisions. …

Case Comment: Heller V. Uber Technologies Inc., Peter Quon

Dalhousie Law Journal

Canadian courts have accepted mandatory arbitration clauses as presumptively enforceable unless there is legislation that precludes their application. This position was confirmed by the Supreme Court in Seidel v. TEL US CommunicationsInc. In Heller v. Uber Technologies Inc., the Ontario Court of Appeal considered an arbitration clause in the context of legislation following the approach in Seidel, but the Court also undertook an unconscionability analysis. Reviewing a motion that was granted to stay a class action proceeding in favour of an arbitration clause, the Court unanimously held that the clause was invalid on two separate grounds. First, the arbitration clause …

Rights And Retrenchment In The Trump Era, Stephen B. Burbank, Sean Farhang

All Faculty Scholarship

Our aim in this essay is to leverage archival research, data and theoretical perspectives presented in our book, Rights and Retrenchment: The Counterrevolution against Federal Litigation, as a means to illuminate the prospects for retrenchment in the current political landscape. We follow the scheme of the book by separately considering the prospects for federal litigation retrenchment in three lawmaking sites: Congress, federal court rulemaking under the Rules Enabling Act, and the Supreme Court. Although pertinent data on current retrenchment initiatives are limited, our historical data and comparative institutional perspectives should afford a basis for informed prediction. Of course, little in …

Juvenile Status Offenses: The Prejudicial Underpinnings Of The Juvenile Justice System, Zachary Auspitz

University of Miami Race & Social Justice Law Review

No abstract provided.

Re-Sentencing Reform: A Comparative Analysis Of The Juvenile Justice System In The United States, United Kingdom, Colombia And Australia, Vianca I. Picart

ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Law Library Blog (September 2018): Legal Beagle's Blog Archive, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Law Library Newsletters/Blog

No abstract provided.

Looking For Venue In The Patently Right Places: A Parallel Study Of The Venue Act And Venue In Anda Litigation, Mengke Xing

San Diego Law Review

Like any other type of litigation, venue is often an important strategic decision for patent infringement litigants. Under the traditional nation-wide venue rule, a patent owner was able to sue a corporate defendant almost in every district in the country, giving rise to abusive forum shopping and the popularity of the Eastern District of Texas. Last year, the Supreme Court in TC Heartland dramatically changed the legal framework of venue in patent litigation, while leaving some issues unaddressed. After a discussion of the evolvement of venue laws and the significance of TC Heartland, this Comment focuses on the Venue Equity …

Punitive Preemption And The First Amendment, Rachel Proctor May

San Diego Law Review

In recent years, state legislators have begun passing a new breed of “punitive” preemption laws–those that impose fines, civil and criminal sanctions, and other sanctions on local governments and their officials as a consequence of passing laws or enacting policies that are inconsistent with state laws. This represents a significant change from traditional preemption, under which a local government could enact laws based on its view of preempting state statutes and applicable state constitutional provisions and, if necessary, defend its interpretation in court. When punitive preemption prevents a local lawmaking process from taking place, the state forecloses a unique form …

The Thinning Vision Of Self-Determination In Court-Connected Mediation: The Inevitable Price Of Institutionalization?, Nancy A. Welsh

Nancy Welsh

Ethical codes for mediators describe party self-determination as “the fundamental principle of mediation,” regardless of the context within which the mediation is occurring. The definition of self-determination, however, is a matter of dispute. Based on a review of the debate surrounding the promulgation and revision of ethical codes for court-connected mediators in Florida and Minnesota, this Article demonstrates that a vision of self-determination anchored in party-centered empowerment is yielding to a vision that is more reflective of the norms and traditional practices of lawyers and judges, as well as the courts’ strong orientation to efficiency and closure of cases through …

The Place Of Court-Connected Mediation In A Democratic Justice System, Nancy A. Welsh

Nancy Welsh

A justice system, and the processes located within it, ought to deliver justice. That seems simple enough. But, of course, delivering justice is never so simple. Justice and the systems that serve it are the creatures of context.

This Article considers mediation as just one innovation within the much larger evolution of the judicial system of the United States. First, this Article outlines how the values of democratic governance undergird our traditional picture of the American justice system, presumably because the invocation of such values helps the system to deliver something that will be respected by the nation’s citizens as …

Making Deals In Court-Connected Mediation: What's Justice Got To Do With It?, Nancy A. Welsh

Nancy Welsh

When mediation was first introduced to the courts, the process was hailed as “alternative.” Mediation gave disputants the opportunity to discuss and resolve their dispute themselves; the role of the third party was to facilitate the disputants’ negotiations, not to dictate the outcome; and because the disputants were able to focus on their underlying interests in mediation, the process could result in creative, customized solutions. The picture of mediation is changing, however, as the process settles into its role as a tool for the resolution of personal injury, contract, and other nonfamily cases on the courts’ civil dockets. Attorneys dominate …

Reforming Property Law To Address Devastating Land Loss, Thomas W. Mitchell

Thomas W. Mitchell

Tenancy-in-common ownership represents the most widespread form of common ownership of real property in the United States. Such ownership under the default rules also represents the most unstable ownership of real property in this country. Thousands of tenancy-in-common property owners, including members of many poor and minority families, have lost their commonly-owned property due to court-ordered, forced partition sales as well as much of their real estate wealth associated with such ownership as a result of such sales. Though some scholars and the media have highlighted how thousands of African-Americans have lost an untold amount of property and substantial real …

The Paragraph 20 Paradox: An Evaluation Of The Enforcement Of Ethical Rules As Substantive Law, Donald E. Campbell

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

This Article addresses an issue courts across the country continue to struggle with: When are ethics rules appropriately considered enforceable substantive obligations, and when should they only be enforceable through the disciplinary process? The question is complicated by the ethics rules themselves. Paragraph 20 of the Scope section of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct includes seemingly contradictory guidance; it states the Rules are not to be used to establish civil liability, but also that they can be “some evidence” of a violation of a lawyer’s standard of care. Most states have adopted this paradoxal Paragraph 20 language. Consequently, courts …

What Makes A Good Judge?, Brian M. Barry

Reports

This article overviews research demonstrating the factors beyond the law that can affect judicial decision-making.

Can Nfl Players Obtain Judicial Review Of Arbitration Decisions On The Merits When A Typical Hourly Union Worker Cannot Obtain This Unusual Court Access?, Michael Z. Green, Kyle T. Carney

Michael Z. Green

Several recent court cases, brought on behalf of National Football League (NFL) players by their union, the NFL Players Association (NFLPA), have increased media and public attention to the challenges of labor arbitrator decisions in federal courts. The Supreme Court has established a body of federal common law that places a high premium on deferring to labor arbitrator decisions and counseling against judges deciding the merits of disputes covered by a collective bargaining agreement (CBA). A recent trend suggests federal judges have ignored this body of law and analyzed the merits of labor arbitration decisions in the NFL setting.

NFL …

“Who Will Judge The Many When The Game Isthrough?”: Considering The Profound Differencesbetween Mental Health Courts And “Traditional”Involuntary Civil Commitment Courts, Michael L. Perlin

Seattle University Law Review

For forty years, we have known that involuntary civil commitment hearings are—in most jurisdictions—“charades.” When the Supreme Court noted, in Parham v. J.R., that the average length of a civil commitment hearing ranged from 3.8 to 9.2 minutes, the reaction of many who had done these cases was, “What? So long?!” The characterization of such hearings as being a “greased runway” to a state institution has never been disputed. Lawyers representing these individuals were bored or contemptuous; judges simply wanted to get cases moving; opposing counsel looked at their wrist watches to see when the cases would be done. This …

Rwu First Amendment Blog: Jared Goldstein's Blog: Masterpiece Cakeshop Ruling: No Constitutional Right To Discriminate (For Now) 06-05-2018, Jared A. Goldstein

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

Deference To Deference: Examining The Relationship Between The Courts And The Political Branches Through Judicial Deference And The Chevron Doctrine, Christopher Yao

Honors Theses

Judicial review of agency rulemaking sits atop a nexus between all three branches of American government, the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. Chevron v. NRDC (1984), a landmark case in administrative law, and its resulting doctrine of strong judicial deference to agencies in their interpretations of statute, are paradoxical in their creation. Although Chevron was decided at the height of Reagan-era deregulation, it greatly enhanced the power of administrative agencies, allowing them to reinterpret the meaning of their statutory directives as needed to justify changes to regulations with less scrutiny from the courts. It is only in recent years …

Hearsay In The Smiley Face: Analyzing The Use Of Emojis As Evidence, Erin Janssen

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming

The Federal–State Standing Gap: How To Enforce Federal Law In Federal Court Without Article Iii Standing, Peter N. Salib, David K. Suska

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

You, too, can sue Donald Trump under the Emoluments Clause!

Since Inauguration Day, several lawsuits have been filed against President Trump because of his refusal to divest certain assets. They assert that Trump’s business interests conflict with the Emoluments Clause of Article I. That arcane provision forbids certain federal officials from accepting any perquisite or gain from a foreign monarch or state. The suits contend, for example, that a foreign dignitary’s booking of a room at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. would constitute an unlawful emolument.

Most commentators quickly threw cold water on the prospect of any plaintiff …

Foreseeably Unclear: The Meaning Of The "Reasonably Foreseeable" Criterion For Access To Medical Assistance In Dying In Canada, Jocelyn Downie, Kate Scallion

Dalhousie Law Journal

Canada's medical assistance in dying legislation contains the eligibility criterion "naturaldeath has become reasonably foreseeable." The phrase "reasonably foreseeable" is unfamiliar and unclear. As a result of ongoing confusion about its meaning, there is reason to be concerned that under- or over-inclusive interpretations of the phrase are adversely affecting access to MAID. With critical interests at stake (eg access to MAiD and potential criminal liability), it is essential that the meaning of the phrase be clarified. Furthermore, the meaning of "reasonably foreseeable" will be at issue in the Charter challenges to the federal MAiD legislation currently before the courts in …

Report Of The Maine Commission On Gender, Justice, And The Courts, Maine Commission On Gender, Justice, And The Courts

Maine Law Review

The Commission on Gender, Justice, and the Courts was established by the Maine Supreme Judicial Court in January 1993, pursuant to a resolution adopted by the Conference of Chief Justices in 1988 urging the creation of task forces to study gender bias and minority concerns within court systems. In recent years, forty-one states, the District of Columbia, and two federal circuits have established task forces on gender bias in the courts as part of a continuing effort to achieve equality for women and men in American society. These jurisdictions recognized that access to a neutral and unbiased court is essential …

Newsroom: Have We Outgrown Brown? 02-06-2018, Michael M. Bowden

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

The Supreme "Courts" Of The Roman Empire, C.G. Bateman

C.G. Bateman

To Speak With One Voice: The Political Effects Of Centralizing The International Legal Defense Of The State, Guillermo J. Garcia Sanchez

Guillermo J. Garcia Sanchez

When a government official defends a case before an international court, whose interest should he/she be representing? In today’s era of expanding international treaties that give standing to individual claimants, international courts review the actions of different government actors through the yardsticks of international law. The state is not unitary; alleged victims can bring international claims against various government entities including the executive, the legislature, the administrative branch, and the judiciary. Yet, the international legal defense of government actions is in the hands of the executive power. This paper focuses on the consequences of this centralization for inter-branch politics. It …

An Unfinished Project: John Courtney Murray, Religious Freedom, And Unresolved Tensions In Contemporary American Society, Miguel H. Diaz

Philosophy: Faculty Publications and Other Works

Religious freedom has re-emerged as a controversial issue in the courts, in the Church, and in the public square in the United States. This essay examines the groundbreaking contribution that John Courtney Murray, SJ made to bring about a paradigm shift in Roman Catholic teaching on religious freedom. This shift can be traced to the Church’s transitioning from the view that “error has no rights” to only people—not ideas—have rights. The essay underscores Murray’s focus on human conscience and addresses tensions that have emerged in the United States between voices that affirm the right to religious freedom and those that …

The Lottery Docket, Daniel Epps, William Ortman

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

A Comparison Of The American Model And French (-Inspired) Appellate Model, Frederic Blockx

Duke Law Master of Judicial Studies Theses

Both the American and the French legal system have a three-tiered structure. However, the respective roles and functions of the courts on each step of the ladder is vastly different in both. Whereas the general system in the U.S. is to have one trial court and two ‘higher’ courts (a court of appeals and a supreme court), the French / European continental system consists of two ‘factual’ courts (the basic level and the court of appeals), and one ‘legal’ (the supreme court) with limited or even inexistent possibilities to look at the facts.

The purpose of this thesis is to …

A Reflection On The Ethics Of Movement Lawyering, Susan Carle, Scott L. Cummings

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

This essay takes a new look at legal ethics issues salient to "movement lawyers" who maintain a sustained commitment to social movement goals and collaborate with social movement organizations over time to achieve them. The essay provides a historical overview of movement lawyering, tracing its development to current practice in which movement lawyers work in collaboration with mobilized social movement groups, though not always in traditional lawyer-client relationships. As this analysis reveals, contemporary movements employ a sophisticated array of strategies, which may pull lawyers away from traditional representation paradigms. We argue that the legal ethics literature on movement lawyering must …

#Sowhitemale - Federal Civil Rulemaking, Brooke D. Coleman

Faculty Articles

116 out of 136. That is the number of white men who have served on the 82-year old committee responsible for creating and maintaining the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The tiny number of non-white, non-male committee members is disproportionate even in the context of the white-male-dominated legal profession. Were the rules simply a technical set of instructions made by a neutral set of experts, perhaps these numbers might not be as disturbing. But that is not the case. The Civil Rules embody normative judgments about the values that have primacy in our civil justice system, and the rulemakers—while expert—are …