Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 31 - 60 of 86

Full-Text Articles in Law

Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur Apr 2010

Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated on the merits even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the Arbitration Fairness Act. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and provide reasoned decisions …


Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur Apr 2010

Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated on the merits even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the Arbitration Fairness Act. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and provide reasoned decisions …


Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur Apr 2010

Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated on the merits even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the Arbitration Fairness Act. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and provide reasoned decisions …


Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur Apr 2010

Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated on the merits even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the Arbitration Fairness Act. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and provide reasoned decisions …


Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur Apr 2010

Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated on the merits even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the Arbitration Fairness Act. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and provide reasoned decisions …


Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur Apr 2010

Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated on the merits even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the Arbitration Fairness Act. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and provide reasoned decisions …


Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur Apr 2010

Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated on the merits even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the Arbitration Fairness Act. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and provide reasoned decisions …


Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur Apr 2010

Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated on the merits even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the Arbitration Fairness Act. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and provide reasoned decisions …


Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur Apr 2010

Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated on the merits even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the Arbitration Fairness Act. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and provide reasoned decisions …


Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur Apr 2010

Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated on the merits even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the Arbitration Fairness Act. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and provide reasoned decisions …


Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur Apr 2010

Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated on the merits even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the Arbitration Fairness Act. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and provide reasoned decisions …


Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur Apr 2010

Growing Pains: Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated on the merits even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the Arbitration Fairness Act. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and provide reasoned decisions …


Empowering The Sentencing Commission: A Different Resolution To The Cocaine Sentencing Drama, Kip D. Nelson Apr 2010

Empowering The Sentencing Commission: A Different Resolution To The Cocaine Sentencing Drama, Kip D. Nelson

Kip D Nelson

No abstract provided.


The Power Of Posner: A Study Of Prestige And Influence In The Federal Judiciary, Christopher C. Mccurdy, Ryan P. Thompson Mar 2010

The Power Of Posner: A Study Of Prestige And Influence In The Federal Judiciary, Christopher C. Mccurdy, Ryan P. Thompson

Christopher C McCurdy

Some judges have a disproportionate influence over the American judiciary; existing research has shown Judge Richard Posner is one of those judges. Our goal was to identify and determine how Judge Posner’s influence has changed over time. To measure and track his influence, we collected and compared citation and invocation data from three distinct time frames. While these measurements are imperfect, they can help illustrate the level of influence and prestige Judge Posner enjoys. The existing literature led us to expect Judge Posner’s early citation rates to be low. After several years on the bench, the citation rates for each …


Understanding Judicial Decision Making In Immigration Cases At The U.S. Courts Of Appeals, Margaret S. Williams, Anna O. Law Mar 2010

Understanding Judicial Decision Making In Immigration Cases At The U.S. Courts Of Appeals, Margaret S. Williams, Anna O. Law

Margaret S. Williams

Immigration is an increasingly important area of decision making for federal judges. The recent increase in appeals of immigration cases to the courts of appeals raises the question whether judges deciding these cases behave in ways consistent with the extant attitudinal literature, or if other factors such as case characteristics and institutional concerns weigh more heavily on the decision making of judges. It is possible, for example, that the country of origin for the alien or the panel on which a judge serves also influence her decision making. Using an original dataset of immigration cases drawn from the Third, Fifth, …


The Art Of Statutory Interpretation: Identifying The Approach Of The Judges Of The United States Court Of Appeals For Veterans' Claims And The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit, Linda D. Jellum Mar 2010

The Art Of Statutory Interpretation: Identifying The Approach Of The Judges Of The United States Court Of Appeals For Veterans' Claims And The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit, Linda D. Jellum

Linda D. Jellum

This article explores judicial approaches to statutory interpretation, a topic of interest to scholars, academics, and practitioners. Perhaps more than any other subject, understanding the theory of interpretation is critical to understanding statutory interpretation because theory drives every aspect of statutory interpretation. A judge’s theory of interpretation determines what information a judge will consider when searching for meaning. For example, some judges will not look at legislative history or social context for meaning unless the text of the statute is ambiguous or absurd. Assuming that the legislative history is helpful to their case, lawyers must learn to “talk the talk” …


Indecisive Reasons For Action: Socrates, Not Hercules, As Judicial Ideal, Eric J. Miller Mar 2010

Indecisive Reasons For Action: Socrates, Not Hercules, As Judicial Ideal, Eric J. Miller

Eric J. Miller

Ronald Dworkin famously introduces the idealized judge, Hercules, to demonstrate how to identify one right answer for any legal problem. Since judicial disagreement makes sense, according to Dworkin, against the background of plural theories of the good, Hercules solves a particular political problem: how to avoid apathy or indecisiveness in choosing among competing theories. Dworkin's judge is supposed to stand by his or her political convictions in the face of competing, plural points of view. Choosing the one right answer is thus a method of political commitment.

My claim is that Dworkin is caught between a rock and a hard …


Process, Outcomes And The Invention Of Tradition: The Growing Importance Of The Appearance Of Judicial Neutrality., Anne Richardson Oakes Mar 2010

Process, Outcomes And The Invention Of Tradition: The Growing Importance Of The Appearance Of Judicial Neutrality., Anne Richardson Oakes

Anne Richardson Oakes

When the U.S. Supreme Court in Caperton v. Massey ruled that judicial recusal under the Due Process clause did not depend upon proof of actual bias but required reference to an objective standard, it asserted the importance of appearance as an aspect of judicial legitimacy and brought this aspect of its jurisprudence into line with that of the European Court of Human Rights. The formulations of both jurisdictions reference the same common law tradition of procedural fairness but now draw divergent conclusions concerning the implications for judges who use technical advisors. This paper explores the tension between process and outcomes …


Empowering The Sentencing Commission: A Different Resolution To The Cocaine Sentencing Drama, Kip D. Nelson Mar 2010

Empowering The Sentencing Commission: A Different Resolution To The Cocaine Sentencing Drama, Kip D. Nelson

Kip D Nelson

No abstract provided.


Sex, Threats, And Absent Victims: The Lessons Of Regina V. Bedingfield For Modern Confrontation And Domestic Violence Cases, Aviva A. Orenstein Mar 2010

Sex, Threats, And Absent Victims: The Lessons Of Regina V. Bedingfield For Modern Confrontation And Domestic Violence Cases, Aviva A. Orenstein

Aviva A. Orenstein

In 2004, Crawford v. Washington, authored by Justice Antonin Scalia, revolutionized the law of confrontation by requiring that, aside from two discrete exceptions, all testimonial statements (those made with the expectation that they will serve to prosecute the accused) be subject to cross-examination. This new interpretation of the Sixth Amendment confrontation clause has profoundly affected domestic violence cases, making it much harder to prosecute them successfully.

Although Justice Scalia’s approach to confrontation is new, it is strikingly similar to the analysis in Regina v. Bedingfield, a notorious English murder case, which excluded from the evidence an alleged statement by the …


Rulemaking, Litigation Culture And Reform In Federal Courts, Edward D. Cavanagh Mar 2010

Rulemaking, Litigation Culture And Reform In Federal Courts, Edward D. Cavanagh

Edward D. Cavanagh

This article examines the role of litigation culture in establishing standards for the conduct of litigation in the federal courts. It argues that culturally based practices are firmly embedded in the federal civil justice system. The practice culture in a particular district may be the source of local rules or may serve as a gap-filler to provide standards where written rules do not exist or are not cost-effective to draft. Rules at odds with cultural practices face resistance from the bench and bar. Culturally rooted practices are not easily dislodged, and a mere amendment to the Federal Rules is unlikely …


Sugarcoating The Eighth Amendment: Gross Disproportionality Review Is Simply The Fourteenth Amendment Rational-Basis Test, Christopher J. Declue Mar 2010

Sugarcoating The Eighth Amendment: Gross Disproportionality Review Is Simply The Fourteenth Amendment Rational-Basis Test, Christopher J. Declue

Christopher J DeClue

It is extremely difficult for a defendant to successfully challenge the length of a sentence under the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. To succeed in such a challenge, a defendant must establish that his sentence is grossly disproportionate to the offense. However, the Court has never offered consistent, workable guidelines to determine whether a sentence is grossly disproportionate.

This Article demonstrates that gross disproportionality review is simply a rational-basis test, one which is virtually identical to the Fourteenth Amendment rational-basis test. Under the Fourteenth Amendment rational-basis test, a law is upheld so long as it furthers a …


Presidential Ambitions Of U.S. Supreme Court Justices:, William G. Ross Mar 2010

Presidential Ambitions Of U.S. Supreme Court Justices:, William G. Ross

William G. Ross

A remarkably large number of U.S. Supreme Court justices have had presidential aspirations while serving on the Court. Several have conducted covert presidential campaigns, and a few nineteenth century justices even campaigned openly from the bench. In at least three quarters of the elections between 1832 and 1956, one or more justices attempted to obtain a presidential or vice presidential nomination or were prominently mentioned as possible candidates. During the past half century, no Supreme Court justice appears to have entertained serious presidential ambitions, probably because no justice who has been appointed during the past fifty years has held any …


Sugarcoating The Eighth Amendment: Gross Disproportionality Review Is Simply The Fourteenth Amendment Rational-Basis Test, Christopher J. Declue Mar 2010

Sugarcoating The Eighth Amendment: Gross Disproportionality Review Is Simply The Fourteenth Amendment Rational-Basis Test, Christopher J. Declue

Christopher J DeClue

It is extremely difficult for a defendant to successfully challenge the length of a sentence under the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. To succeed in such a challenge, a defendant must establish that his sentence is grossly disproportionate to the offense. However, the Court has never offered consistent, workable guidelines to determine whether a sentence is grossly disproportionate.

This Article demonstrates that gross disproportionality review is simply a rational-basis test, one which is virtually identical to the Fourteenth Amendment rational-basis test. Under the Fourteenth Amendment rational-basis test, a law is upheld so long as it furthers a …


Why The Supreme Court Issues Plurality Opinions, David R. Stras, James F. Spriggs Mar 2010

Why The Supreme Court Issues Plurality Opinions, David R. Stras, James F. Spriggs

David R Stras

Many of the Supreme Court’s most important decisions, such as those involving executive power and the constitutionality of abortion regulations, are decided by plurality decision. Plurality opinions result when five or more Justices agree on the result in a particular case but no single rationale or opinion garners five votes. Many Justices, including William Rehnquist and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, have addressed the problems created by plurality opinions, such as interpretive difficulties in determining the Court’s holding, but few scholars have addressed plurality decisions other than in passing. In the first empirical analysis examining the occurrence of plurality decisions, the authors …


Sex, Threats, And Absent Victims: The Lessons Of Regina V. Bedingfield For Modern Confrontation And Domestic Violence Cases, Aviva A. Orenstein Mar 2010

Sex, Threats, And Absent Victims: The Lessons Of Regina V. Bedingfield For Modern Confrontation And Domestic Violence Cases, Aviva A. Orenstein

Aviva A. Orenstein

In 2004, Crawford v. Washington, authored by Justice Antonin Scalia, revolutionized the law of confrontation by requiring that, aside from two discrete exceptions, all testimonial statements (those made with the expectation that they will serve to prosecute the accused) be subject to cross-examination. This new interpretation of the Sixth Amendment confrontation clause has profoundly affected domestic violence cases, making it much harder to prosecute them successfully.

Although Justice Scalia’s approach to confrontation is new, it is strikingly similar to the analysis in Regina v. Bedingfield, a notorious English murder case, which excluded from the evidence an alleged statement by the …


Evaluating Children’S Competency To Testify: Developing A Rational Method To Assess A Young Child’S Capacity To Offer Reliable Testimony In Cases Alleging Child Sex Abuse, Laurie Shanks Mar 2010

Evaluating Children’S Competency To Testify: Developing A Rational Method To Assess A Young Child’S Capacity To Offer Reliable Testimony In Cases Alleging Child Sex Abuse, Laurie Shanks

Laurie Shanks

There are few crimes which elicit a response as emotionally charged as those involving an allegation of child sexual abuse. Given the paucity of physical and scientific evidence in many cases and the resulting need to rely almost exclusively on the testimony of a very young child, the cases present unique challenges for judges, prosecutors and criminal defense attorneys. While many scholars have addressed the dangers inherent in questioning children, such as creating false memories and improperly influencing testimony, there has been little exploration of the means employed by courts to evaluate a child’s ability to offer reliable testimony. Many …


The Adjudicative Method Of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jordan J. Saint John Feb 2010

The Adjudicative Method Of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jordan J. Saint John

Jordan J Saint John

Oliver Wendell Holmes was among this country’s most preeminent jurists, adjudicating cases for over fifty years, first on the Massachusetts high bench, and then on the United States Supreme Court. Yet he never explicitly revealed his method of adjudication. It is the thesis of this paper that Justice Holmes did have such a method, and that he revealed it implicitly.

The first three steps of the four-step method this author has identified were presented by Holmes in his classic address, The Path of the Law. There, he commended to students a three-step approach for fruitfully studying the law. However, the …


Averting The Captain Vere “Veer”: Billy Budd As Melville’S Republican Response To Plato, Robert E. Atkinson Feb 2010

Averting The Captain Vere “Veer”: Billy Budd As Melville’S Republican Response To Plato, Robert E. Atkinson

Robert E. Atkinson Jr.

This article shows how Melville’s Billy Budd, rightly one of law and literature’s most widely studied canonical texts, answers Plato’s challenge in Book X of the Republic: Show how “poets” create better citizens, especially better rulers, or banish them from the commonwealth of reasoned law. Captain Vere is a flawed but instructive version of the Republic’s philosopher-king, even as his story is precisely the sort of “poetry” that Plato should willing allow, by his own republican principles, into the ideal polity. Not surprisingly, the novella shows how law’s agents must be wise, even as their law must be philosophical, if …


Anna Nicole Smith Goes Shopping: The New Forum Shopping Problem In Bankruptcy, Gilbert Marcus Cole, Todd J. Zywicki Feb 2010

Anna Nicole Smith Goes Shopping: The New Forum Shopping Problem In Bankruptcy, Gilbert Marcus Cole, Todd J. Zywicki

Gilbert Marcus Cole

The American bankruptcy system is a hybrid of state law and federal bankruptcy law. Under the Butner principle, federal bankruptcy courts preserve substantive non-bankruptcy law entitlements in bankruptcy unless bankruptcy policies compel a contrary result. This hybrid system, however, gives rise to the threat of forum-shopping if parties attempt to invoke bankruptcy jurisdiction for improper purposes, namely to rearrange non-bankruptcy entitlements to advance no coherent bankruptcy policy. Modern developments in bankruptcy law, as exemplified in the case of Marshall v. Marshall raise a novel threat of bankruptcy forum-shopping. Marshall involved the bankruptcy of tabloid starlet Anna Nicole Smith and her …