Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Mortgage Modification, Equitable Subordination, And The Honest But Unfortunate Creditor, Juliet Moringiello
Mortgage Modification, Equitable Subordination, And The Honest But Unfortunate Creditor, Juliet Moringiello
Juliet M Moringiello
Mortgage foreclosures are at an all-time high and property values in many parts of the country have declined precipitously. Yet bankruptcy, which is often a last resort for individuals in financial distress, provides little relief to a homeowner who finds that her mortgage debt exceeds the value of her home. The reason for bankruptcy’s inadequacy in this regard is the Bankruptcy Code’s prohibition on the modification of home mortgages, a prohibition that became part of bankruptcy law in 1978, when most home mortgage loans were 30-year fixed rate loans made by savings and loan associations. While most secured loans can …
Sailing A Sea Of Doubt: A Critique Of The Rule Of Reason In U.S. Antitrust Law, Jesse W. Markham Jr.
Sailing A Sea Of Doubt: A Critique Of The Rule Of Reason In U.S. Antitrust Law, Jesse W. Markham Jr.
Jesse Markham
The purpose of the article is to offer a critique of the rule of reason, tracing its disintegration from its original articulation 100 years ago in Standard Oil Co. v. United States, 221 U.S. 1, 60 (1911). The article then describes a construct for restoring transparency and content to the rule of reason. The rule of reason is the default standard for assessing restraints under the Sherman Act. The role for the rule of reason has expanded in recent years as the Supreme Court has reversed a number of per se rules, thus relegating additional categories of restraints to the …
Revelation And Reaction: The Struggle To Shape American Arbitration, Thomas J. Stipanowich
Revelation And Reaction: The Struggle To Shape American Arbitration, Thomas J. Stipanowich
Thomas J. Stipanowich
In this article, Professor Stipanowich explores recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and the implications for the respective domains of courts of law and arbitration tribunals regarding so-called “gateway” determinations surrounding the enforcement of arbitration agreements and the contracts of which they are a part. The decisions address the complex interplay between federal substantive law focusing on questions of arbitrability, a body of law defined and expanded by the Court under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), and the law of the states and bring into play competing judicial philosophies of contractual assent and contrasting views about the balance between …
The Third Arbitration Trilogy: Stolt-Nielsen, Rent-A-Center, Concepcion And The Future Of American Arbitration, Thomas J. Stipanowich
The Third Arbitration Trilogy: Stolt-Nielsen, Rent-A-Center, Concepcion And The Future Of American Arbitration, Thomas J. Stipanowich
Thomas J. Stipanowich
For the third time in the modern era, a triad of key Supreme Court decisions represents a milestone in American arbitration. In this highly controversial “Third Arbitration Trilogy,” the U.S. Supreme Court aggressively expands the “revealed” penumbra of substantive arbitration law under the Federal Arbitration Act and shores up the bulwarks of private, binding dispute resolution under standardized contracts of adhesion binding employees and consumers. In Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds International, 130 S. Ct. 1758 (2010), the Court, against the backdrop of an international commercial contract scheme and a unique procedural scenario, draws upon the wellspring of divined “federal substantive …