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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Elawyering And The Future Of Legal Work, Richard Granat, Blair Janis, Stephanie Kimbro, Marc Lauritsen Apr 2010

Elawyering And The Future Of Legal Work, Richard Granat, Blair Janis, Stephanie Kimbro, Marc Lauritsen

Continuing Legal Education (CLE) Lecture Series

eLawyering is doing legal work – not just marketing it – over the Web. Pioneering practitioners have found dramatic new ways to communicate and collaborate with clients and other lawyers, produce documents, settle disputes, interact with courts, and manage legal knowledge. There are exciting initiatives underway now that deserve attention by all lawyers – present and future. The legal profession is being disrupted from without and from within. To be successful in the coming era, lawyers will need to know how to practice over the Web, manage client relationships in cyberspace, and offer “unbundled” services. This program discusses the knowledge …


Manipulating And Hiding Terrorist Content On The Internet: Legal And Tradecraft Issues, Jack F. Williams Jan 2008

Manipulating And Hiding Terrorist Content On The Internet: Legal And Tradecraft Issues, Jack F. Williams

Faculty Publications By Year

No abstract provided.


"Defendant Veto" Or "Totality Of The Circumstances?": It's Time For The Supreme Court To Straighten Out The Personal Jurisdiction Standard Once Again, Robert J. Condlin Jan 2004

"Defendant Veto" Or "Totality Of The Circumstances?": It's Time For The Supreme Court To Straighten Out The Personal Jurisdiction Standard Once Again, Robert J. Condlin

Faculty Scholarship

Commentators frequently claim that there is no single, coherent doctrine of extra-territorial personal jurisdiction, and, unfortunately, they are correct. The International Shoe case, commonly (but inaccurately) thought of as the wellspring of the modern form of the doctrine, announced a relatively straightforward, two-factor, four-permutation test that worked well for resolving most cases. In the nearly sixty-year period following Shoe, however, as the Supreme Court expanded and refined the standard, what was once straightforward and uncomplicated became serendipitous and convoluted. Two general, and generally incompatible, versions of the doctrine competed for dominance. The first, what might best be described as …