Law Commons^™

Civil Means To Criminal Ends, Kathryn Ramsey Mason

Washington and Lee Law Review

The divide between the civil and criminal legal systems is one of the most fundamental distinctions in American law. There are laws, however, that do not fit clearly into either category and the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on how to categorize these statutes has been murky. Crime-free rental housing ordinances, which encourage or coerce private landlords into evicting tenants for a single incident of criminal activity that does not need to result in a conviction, are an example of the laws that occupy this middle ground. Local legislatures designate these laws as civil statutes and use them as a means to …

State V. Leonard, 296 A.3d 111 (R.I. 2023)., Jillian L. Murray

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Proving Racism: Gibson Bros. Inc. V. Oberlin College And The Implications On Defamation Law, Liam H. Mcmillin

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Using Burdens Of Proof To Allocate The Risk Of Error When Assessing Developmental Maturity Of Youthful Offenders, David L. Faigman, Kelsey Geiser

William & Mary Law Review

Behavioral and neuroscientific research provides a relatively clear window into the timing of developmental maturity from adolescence to early adulthood. We know with considerable confidence that, on average, sixteen-year-olds are less developmentally mature than nineteen-year-olds, who are less developmentally mature than twenty-three-year-olds, who are less developmentally mature than twenty-six-year-olds. However, in the context of a given case, the question presented might be whether a particular seventeen-year-old defendant convicted of murder is “developmentally mature enough” that a sentence of life without parole can be constitutionally imposed on him or her. While developmental maturity can be accurately measured in group data, it …

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 …

Omar Effendi Vs. Union Fenosa: Corruption As A Transnational Public Policy Consideration, Ahmed Badr Eldin

Theses and Dissertations

At the beginning of 2011, Egypt witnessed radical political developments that led to the emergence of a pressing tendency to adjudicate the collapsed regime’s policies and practices. Shortly thereafter, the Egyptian State Council issued a number of judicial decisions that confirmed that the sale of the privatized governmental enterprises had been tainted by corruption. Crucially, the Court maintained that flagrant breach of law, regulations, and administrative orders that encompassed these transactions created serious suspicions about corruption committed by public officials and investors. It concluded that the existence of corruption, as a transnational public policy consideration, had deprived foreign investors of …

Lifting The Veil Of Mona Lisa: A Multifaceted Investigation Of The "Beyond A Reasonable Doubt" Standard, Zhuhao Wang, Eric Zhi

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

For a long period of time, the golden standard in judicial fact-finding of criminal cases in the United States and many other countries has been the “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt” (BARD) standard – every person accused of a crime is presumed to be innocent unless, and until, his or her guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt. The BARD standard’s undergirding principle is one of error distribution, where wrongful conviction of the innocent is a much greater wrong than failed conviction of the guilty. This concept was famously expressed by the English jurist William Blackstone in 1760s: “It is better …

Amicus Curiae Observations By Public International Law & Policy Group, Milena Sterio, Michael P. Scharf, Paul R. Williams

Law Faculty Briefs and Court Documents

The amicus brief argues that in a case where the defendant alleges a ground excluding criminal responsibility (an affirmative defense), such as mental illness or duress, the defendant has an evidentiary burden to produce some evidence to support his/her claim of mental illness or duress, but that the prosecution retains the legal burden of proof to establish the defendant's responsibility beyond reasonable doubt.

“This ruling will have repercussions for future cases where the defendant asserts a mental illness or duress affirmative defense. Depending on how the ICC decides, future defendants will have to meet a specific evidentiary (or legal) burden …

The Functional Operation Of Workers’ Compensation Covid Presumptions, Michael C. Duff

All Faculty Scholarship

During 2020, a number of U.S. states implemented workers' compensation COVID-19 presumptions. This short informal paper defines and explains legal presumptions generally and then discusses the workers' compensation presumptions. The paper contends that at this juncture it is not clear whether states intended to enact "Thayer-Wigmore" or "Morgan" presumptions; but if they operate as Thayer-Wigmore presumptions they will not do workers' compensation claimants much good in the context of non-jury proceedings presided over by administrative law judges.

(Un)Masking The Truth - The Cruel And Unusual Punishment Of Prisoners Amidst The Covid-19 Pandemic, Ariel Berkowitz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Adverse Cyber Operations: Causality, Attribution, Evidence, And Due Diligence, Hans-Georg Dederer, Tassilo Singer

International Law Studies

Adverse cyber operations against States are on the rise, and so are the legal challenges related to such incidents under public international law. This article will not delve into already intensely debated problems of classification, such as whether adverse cyber operations constitute “armed attacks” or “use of force.” Rather, the article will focus on causality and attribution with special regard to problems of evidence. In particular, the article will elaborate on the applicable standards of proof to be met by the victim State when submitting, or having to submit, evidence to justify self-defense or countermeasures against the State of origin. …

Surprise Vs. Probability As A Metric For Proof, Edward K. Cheng, Matthew Ginther

Edward Cheng

In this Symposium issue celebrating his career, Professor Michael Risinger in Leveraging Surprise proposes using "the fundamental emotion of surprise" as a way of measuring belief for purposes of legal proof. More specifically, Professor Risinger argues that we should not conceive of the burden of proof in terms of probabilities such as 51%, 95%, or even "beyond a reasonable doubt." Rather, the legal system should reference the threshold using "words of estimative surprise" -asking jurors how surprised they would be if the fact in question were not true. Toward this goal (and being averse to cardinality), he suggests categories such …

Gender Pay Gap: The Time To Speak Up Is Now, Samantha M. Sbrocchi

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Prisoner, Prison And Situational Characteristics And Their Relationship With The Prevalence, Incidence And Type Of Prison Offending Recorded By A Sample Of Prisoners Within Western Australian Prisons, Catharine Phillips

Theses: Doctorates and Masters

The importance that researchers and prison administrators have placed on ensuring that the good governance, security and safety of prisons are maintained has generated a number of studies of prison offending. Previous studies have identified several prisoner, prison and situational characteristics as relevant in regard to their relationship with the prevalence, incidence and type of prison offences committed. However, no studies have been conducted in Australia, and therefore no studies have included Aboriginal prisoners in their prisoner samples. In addition, the differences in regard to legislation pertaining to prison offending between jurisdictions is also of importance when considering the generalisability …

The Issues Of Implementation Into The Legislation Of The Republic Of Uzbekistan Certain Provisions Of Article 53 Of The Un Convention Against Corruption, U Nigmadjanov

ProAcademy

This article addresses the issue of implementation to the legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan certain provisions of Article 53 of the UN Convention against Corruption on criminal assets recovery in terms of permitting foreign state to initiate civil suits in the courts of the member states to establish ownership of property acquired through corruption offenses. The author analyzed the existing mechanism for filing civil claims for recognition of ownership of assets by foreign states in the courts of the Republic of Uzbekistan, as well as solving civil suit within criminal proceedings.

Surprise Vs. Probability As A Metric For Proof, Edward K. Cheng, Matthew Ginther

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In this Symposium issue celebrating his career, Professor Michael Risinger in Leveraging Surprise proposes using "the fundamental emotion of surprise" as a way of measuring belief for purposes of legal proof. More specifically, Professor Risinger argues that we should not conceive of the burden of proof in terms of probabilities such as 51%, 95%, or even "beyond a reasonable doubt." Rather, the legal system should reference the threshold using "words of estimative surprise" -asking jurors how surprised they would be if the fact in question were not true. Toward this goal (and being averse to cardinality), he suggests categories such …

Changes To The Mhra Raise Burden Of Proof And Limit Damages For Plaintiffs, Megan Crowe

SLU Law Journal Online

In this article, Megan Crowe discusses Missouri Senate Bill 43, passed by Gov. Eric Greitens on June 30, 2017, raising the burden of proof and enacting damage caps in employment discrimination cases filed under the Missouri Human Rights Act.

Animal Sentience And The Precautionary Principle, Jonathan Birch

Animal Sentience

In debates about animal sentience, the precautionary principle is often invoked. The idea is that when the evidence of sentience is inconclusive, we should “give the animal the benefit of the doubt” or “err on the side of caution” in formulating animal protection legislation. Yet there remains confusion as to whether it is appropriate to apply the precautionary principle in this context, and, if so, what “applying the precautionary principle” means in practice regarding the burden of proof for animal sentience. Here I construct a version of the precautionary principle tailored to the question of animal sentience together with a …

A New Theory Of Equitable Apportionment, David Gamage, Darien Shanske

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This essay analyzes the purpose of the equitable apportionment doctrine in state and local tax jurisprudence, arguing that the doctrine remains coherent in the context of single-sales-factor apportionment regimes.

The Value Of Accuracy In The Patent System, Stephen Yelderman

Journal Articles

Because it must rely on imperfect information, the patent system will inevitably make mistakes. To determine how the system ought to err in cases of uncertainty—and whether a given mistake is worth correcting—scholars have composed a simple picture of the consequences of error in either direction. On the one hand, erroneous patent awards impose unjustified costs. On the other hand, erroneous patent denials discourage successful inventors and reduce incentives to create in the future. The result is an essentially indeterminate balancing, in which policies of overly liberal awards drive up costs, and policies of overly cautious awards drive down incentives. …

Refining The Precautionary Framework, Jonathan Birch

Animal Sentience

Most of the commentators so far agree that the precautionary principle can be usefully applied to the question of animal sentience. I consider various ways of refining my proposals in light of the suggestions. I amend BAR to implement C. Brown’s suggestion that the scope of animal welfare law should be extensible by phylogenetic inference from orders in which credible indicators of sentience are found. In response to C. Brown, Mallatt, and Woodruff, I amend ACT to allow that a single credible indicator may sometimes call for urgent further investigation rather than immediate protection. In response …

Reaching For Environmental And Economic Harmony: Can Ttip Negotiations Bridge The U.S.-Eu Chemical Regulatory Gap?, Ashley Henson

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Contracts - Arbitration Agreement - An Arbitration Agreement In An International Contract Is To Be Given Full Effect By Federal Courts Except Where Public Policy Or Equity Dictate Otherwise, James D. Dunham, J. S. Schuster

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Has The Supreme Court’S Schaffer Decision Placed Aburden On Hearing Officer Decision-Making Under Theidea?, Cathy A. Skidmore, Perry A. Zirkel

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This article provides a systematic examination of the BOP in hearing officer decisions both before and after Schaffer. Part II examines the legal basis for the BOP both before and after the U.S. Supreme Court decision, resulting in the questions for this study. Part III explains the method used to collect and analyze the data, and Part IV presents the results that answer the specific research questions. Part V discusses those results and the implications of the findings for special education dispute resolution and provides recommendations for further study.

Good Cause Is Bad News: How The Good Cause Standard For Record Access Impacts Adult Adoptees Seeking Personal Information And A Proposal For Reform, Christopher G.A. Loriot

University of Massachusetts Law Review

There are many hurdles that adult adoptees face when seeking access to personal information contained in original birth records or adoption proceedings. One such hurdle is the widely-used good cause standard, which requires adoptees seeking information to show good cause to obtain access. This standard is problematic primarily for its vagueness. Very few jurisdictions that use this standard define “good cause” in any meaningful way, and case law interpreting good cause statutory language is inconsistent at best. Although it is meant to protect the privacy interests of all parties in an adoption proceeding, the good cause standard acts as a …

The Legal Limits Of “Yes Means Yes”, Paul H. Robinson

All Faculty Scholarship

This op-ed piece for the Chronicle of Higher Education argues that the affirmative consent rule of "yes means yes" is a useful standard that can help educate and ideally change norms regarding consent to sexual intercourse. But that goal can best be achieved by using “yes means yes” as an ex ante announcement of the society's desired rule of conduct. That standard only becomes problematic when used as the ex post principle of adjudication for allegations of rape. Indeed, those most interested in changing existing norms ought to be the persons most in support of distinguishing these two importantly different …

What's Coming For Class Actions,, Zoe Niesel

Faculty Articles

A trio of cases before the Supreme Court in its current term has the potential to dramatically impact the ability of plaintiffs to bring class actions. By taking up Tyson Foods v. Bouaphakeo, Spokeo v. Robins, and Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez, the Court could be signaling that a shift against class actions is underway which could have significant consequences for plaintiffs seeking class certification.

Recently, in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, Comcast v. Behrend, and AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, the Court handed down decisions that increased the burden on plaintiffs' attorneys to show issues and damages common to all plaintiffs in the proposed …

Fault Lines In Trademark Default Judgments, David S. Welkowitz

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

The Incompatibility Of Due Process And Naked Statistical Evidence, G. Alexander Nunn

Vanderbilt Law Review

Qualitative evidence is a cornerstone of the modern trial system. Parties often invoke eyewitness testimony, character witnesses, or other forms of direct and circumstantial evidence when seeking to advance their case in the courtroom, enabling jurors to reach a verdict after weighing two competing narratives.' But what if testimonial, experience-based evidence were removed from trials? In a legal system that draws its legitimacy from centuries of tradition-emphasizing notions of fairness even above absolute accuracy. Would a jury, not to mention the public at large, reject a verdict that imposes liability or guilt on a defendant in the complete absence of …

Standards Of Proof In Civil Litigation: An Experiment From Patent Law, David L. Schwartz, Christopher B. Seaman

Christopher B. Seaman

Standards of proof are widely assumed to matter in litigation. They operate to allocate the risk of error between litigants, as well as to indicate the relative importance attached to the ultimate decision. But despite their perceived importance, there have been relatively few empirical studies testing jurors’ comprehension and application of standards of proof, particularly in civil litigation. Patent law recently presented an opportunity to assess the potential impact of varying the standard of proof in civil cases. In Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Limited Partnership, the Supreme Court held that a patent’s presumption of validity can only be overcome by …