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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 8 of 8

Full-Text Articles in Law

Problems In The Removal Of Federal Civil Servants, Ivor L. M. Richardson Dec 1955

Problems In The Removal Of Federal Civil Servants, Ivor L. M. Richardson

Michigan Law Review

The publicity given in the past few years to the loyalty and security program has brought the civil servant of the federal government increasingly before the public eye. At the same time little attention has been paid to the plight of a civil servant who is dismissed from his post for reasons other than those relating to loyalty and security. It is the purpose of this paper to consider different aspects of the removal of civil servants. We shall discuss (1) the government's power to remove civil servants both at common law and under statutes which deal with the exercise …


Criminal Law - Contradictory Statements Under Oath As Grounds For Perjury In The Federal Courts, Richard M. Adams S.Ed. Jun 1955

Criminal Law - Contradictory Statements Under Oath As Grounds For Perjury In The Federal Courts, Richard M. Adams S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Perjury has frequently been described as one of the more difficult convictions to obtain, and the truth of this saying is no better illustrated than in the case of Harvey Matusow. During the two years in which ex-Communist Matusow served as a professional government witness, he accused 180 or more persons as being members of the Communist Party or Communist sympathizers. This same witness has now described himself as a "habitual and perpetual liar" and has publicly admitted that all of his previous testimony was false. On the strength of this recantation, motions were filed for a new trial in …


Legislation - Witness Immunity Act Of 1954 - Constitutional And Interpretative Problem, George S. Flint S.Ed. Apr 1955

Legislation - Witness Immunity Act Of 1954 - Constitutional And Interpretative Problem, George S. Flint S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

The passage in August, 1954 of a federal statute granting immunity under specified conditions to witnesses before congressional committees and in the federal courts marks a third legislative experiment designed to soften the effect of the Fifth Amendment as a limitation on the investigatory power of Congress. The first two attempts were less than successful. This comment will discuss the historical background of immunity legislation, and some possible constitutional pitfalls and problems of construction created by the statutory language.


Constitutional Law - Public Use Requirement And The Power Of Eminent Domain, Donald F. Oosterhouse S.Ed. Apr 1955

Constitutional Law - Public Use Requirement And The Power Of Eminent Domain, Donald F. Oosterhouse S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Under the District of Columbia Redevelopment Act, an agency was created to redevelop blighted and slum areas. Pursuant to the mode of operation prescribed in the statute, the agency intended to purchase or take by eminent domain all the property in the vicinity of appellant's property. After getting title to all the property the agency was to lease or sell it to private enterprisers to redevelop the area according to the agency's comprehensive plan, which specified definite boundaries for various uses. Appellant brought this action to enjoin the condemnation of his business property, claiming that the statute was unconstitutional because …


Constitutional Law - Right To Effective Assistance Of Counsel In Federal Courts And Waiver Thereof, Richard M. Adams S.Ed. Apr 1955

Constitutional Law - Right To Effective Assistance Of Counsel In Federal Courts And Waiver Thereof, Richard M. Adams S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Indicted for illegal traffic in narcotics, petitioner and his trial counsel allegedly attempted to fabricate an alibi on the false testimony of petitioner's girl friend. The evidence indicated that on several occasions before trial, the girl was invited to the office of petitioner's attorney, given narcotics, and told to memorize certain false testimony to be used in petitioner's defense. Later the girl bad a change of mind and agreed to testify for the government Despite the strenuous objections of defendant's counsel, a description of this alleged fraud on the court was given in the prosecution's opening statement, and the witness …


Griswold: The Fifth Amendment Today, George S. Flint S.Ed. Mar 1955

Griswold: The Fifth Amendment Today, George S. Flint S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Fifth Amendment Today. By Erwin N. Griswold


Labor Law - Arbitration - Right Of Employer Of Discharge Employer Who Refuses To Testify Concerning His Communist Affiliation, Mary Lee Ryan Feb 1955

Labor Law - Arbitration - Right Of Employer Of Discharge Employer Who Refuses To Testify Concerning His Communist Affiliation, Mary Lee Ryan

Michigan Law Review

A member of the United Electrical Workers Union was discharged from the J. H. Day Company because of his refusal to testify concerning his communist affiliation before the Ohio Un-American Activities Committee and because of the unfavorable publicity which had resulted. Under grievance procedure, the union brought the matter before arbitration. Findings, there was no just cause for dismissal. The employee is entitled to back pay and to reinstatement subject to security clearance. J. H. Day Company,. 22 LAB. Aim. RBP. 751 (1954).


Constitutional Law - Federal Regulation Of Lobbying Act - Vague And Indefinite Language As Violation Of First And Fifth Amendment, Arne Hovdesven Feb 1955

Constitutional Law - Federal Regulation Of Lobbying Act - Vague And Indefinite Language As Violation Of First And Fifth Amendment, Arne Hovdesven

Michigan Law Review

Defendants were charged with violation of the Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act because of failure to register as lobbyists under provisions of section 308 and to report expenditures as directed by section 305. The lower court found these sections of the statute unconstitutional and dismissed the information. On appeal, held, the act is not so vague and indefinite as to violate the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment; nor does it violate the First Amendment. The penalty provision of section 310(b) is not objectionable as a deprivation of First Amendment rights since it is separable. United States v. …