Law Commons^™

Inventing Norms, William Hubbard

All Faculty Scholarship

Patent law strives to promote the progress of technology by encouraging invention. Traditionally, scholars contend that patent law achieves this goal by creating financial incentives to invent in the form of exclusive rights to new technology. This traditional view of invention, however, fails to recognize that inventors are motivated by more than money. Like most people, inventors are also motivated by social norms, that is, shared normative beliefs favoring certain actions while disfavoring others. This Article argues that many Americans embrace social norms that favor and encourage successful invention. Because of these "inventing norms" inventors enjoy enhanced personal satisfaction and …

Government By Contract And The Structural Constitution, Kimberly L. Wehle

All Faculty Scholarship

Although private parties have performed government functions throughout most of Western history, mainstream administrative law scholarship is dotted with concerns over the extent to which modern federal government activities are outsourced to private contractors. Federal contractors routinely exercise authority that is classically “executive” in nature. They write regulations, interpret laws, administer foreign aid, manage nuclear weapons sites and intelligence operations, interrogate detainees, control borders, design surveillance systems, and provide military support in combat zones. Administrative law places few constraints on private contractors, and prevailing constitutional principles — the state action and private delegation doctrines, in particular — are either inept …

Flp Loss, But Crummey Win, Wendy G. Gerzog

All Faculty Scholarship

In Turner the Tax Court determined that section 2036 applied to the decedent’s transfers of assets to his family limited partnership but that the insurance premiums he paid indirectly to his insurance trust qualified for the annual exclusion.

The New Super-Charged Pat (Power Of Appointment Trust), Wendy G. Gerzog

All Faculty Scholarship

This article proposes to repeal the QTIP provisions in order to collect revenue now for transfers that are essentially transfers to third parties and not to the decedent's spouse. Because there are advantages of increased flexibility attendant to a QTIP as opposed to a PAT, this article proposes to take those repealed QTIP benefits and attach them to the PAT, which would greatly enhance that marital deduction trust form. A super-charged PAT would thereby be able to preserve the decedent's GST tax exemption (like a reverse QTIP), create a decedent's by-pass trust by allowing a PAT (or a partial PAT) …

A Right To Legal Aid: The Aba Model Access Act In International Perspective, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

For over two centuries America has failed to fulfill its revolutionary ideals of bringing equal justice to all. In August 2010 the American Bar Association moved to bring the nation closer to its ideals when it proposed the ABA Model Access Act. The Act would do what the Supreme Court of the United States has refused to do: it would recognize that legal aid in civil litigation is a matter of right and not of charity. The Act is a framework law and leaves many details to be filled in by enacting bodies and by the institutions eventually charged with …

The Garcetti Virus, Nancy M. Modesitt

All Faculty Scholarship

In an era where corporate malfeasance has imposed staggering costs on society, ranging from the largest oil spill in recorded history to the largest government bailout of Wall Street, one would think that those who uncover corporate wrongdoing before it causes significant harm should receive awards. Employees are particularly well-placed to uncover such wrongdoing within companies. However, rather than reward these employees, employers tend to fire or marginalize them. While there are statutory protections for whistleblowers, a disturbing new trend appears to be developing: courts are excluding from the protection of whistleblowing statutes employees who report wrongdoing as part of …

Excluding Expert Valuation Testimony, Wendy G. Gerzog

All Faculty Scholarship

In Boltar, a case in which the Tax Court addressed the valuation of a conservation easement, the court ruled on the admissibility of expert testimony.

Making Fiction Of Facts In The Israeli Spy Case, Kenneth Lasson, Angelo Codevilla, Lawrence J. Korb, John Loftus

All Faculty Scholarship

The authors make the case that Jonathan Pollard, the man convicted of spying for Israel, is again being condemned by new allegations by Martin Peretz in a New Republic article, and by retired Navy Capt. M. E. Bowman. The authors of these new assertions may not know more of the particulars than others in high places who have already publicly supported commuting Pollard's sentence to time served.

No More 'Sha Still', Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

This op-ed laments the consequences of staying quiet in light of recent national and international events. It takes President Obama to task for blaming Israel for lack of progress in Middle East peace negotiations, as well as Congress for its ineptitude during the recent national debt ceiling negotiations.

Failure Of The Current Anti-Corruption Strategy In Afghanistan, Hugh Barrett Mcclean

All Faculty Scholarship

Corruption has come to the forefront in Afghanistan as the United States tries to balance efforts to back anti-corruption strategies while maintaining a positive relationship with the Karzai government. Stalled corruption cases suggest corruption in Afghanistan is systemic and not limited to a particular governing body or official. It is clear that corruption exists in both the upper and lower echelons of Afghan society, and will continue to exist until the U.S.-backed anti-corruption teams are accepted by the Afghan government. The strengthening of key institutions continues to be the recommended international model. As demonstrated in the United States, the integration …

Obama's Woes, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

This short op-ed piece discusses Barack Obama's presidency, particularly with regard to Jewish issues and with Israel and the Middle East. The writer offers his rationale why the President's support among Jewish voters is slipping.

Shapiro: Palimony And The Estate Tax, Wendy G. Gerzog

All Faculty Scholarship

In Estate of Shapiro, the Ninth Circuit held that an individual had a valid palimony claim under Nevada state law. However, the issue was whether the decedent’s estate qualified for a deduction for that claim under federal estate tax law.

As Antitrust Case Ends, Microsoft Is Victorious In Defeat, Norman Hawker, Robert H. Lande

All Faculty Scholarship

As the final judgment in the celebrated Microsoft case ends, this piece very briefly assesses the impact of its remedy. When evaluated in terms of its most important goals, the remedy has proven to be a failure. Microsoft's monopoly power in the PC operating systems market is now as great as it was when the case was brought in 1998 or the remedy was ordered in 2002. The article also very briefly discusses the implications of this remedy for Google and AT&T.

Let My People Go!, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

This short article discusses the continued imprisonment of Jonathan Pollard for spying for Israel, as well as that of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, imprisoned by Hamas. Also discussed are the inequalities of the negotiations for their release, leaving Israel and the U.S. in a bad light.

Hammerin’ Hank & The Golden Arm: Remembering Baseball’S Jewish Hall Of Famers, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

This cover story focuses on two of baseball’s greatest players, Sandy Koufax, and Hank Greenberg. Besides describing their great talent for the game, it also chronicles the religious discrimination, taunts and abuse they had to endure for their religious beliefs, not just from the public, but occasionally from members of opposing teams as well.

"On The Take": The Black Box Of Credit Scoring And Mortgage Discrimination, Cassandra Jones Havard

All Faculty Scholarship

Subprime credit, a relatively new method of risk-based pricing, has been hailed as a way to open up markets and provide access to credit to those who would otherwise be excluded. Evidence suggests that subprime mortgage segmentation increases rather than reduces exclusionary practices in lending. Furthermore, what is unclear is how lenders determine who qualifies as a subprime borrower. This concern became manifested when studies demonstrated that minority borrowers, regardless of creditworthiness, are more likely to receive expensive, sub-prime loans. The disparity is properly attributed to lenders’ credit pricing policies which included discretionary increases despite the objectively-determined risk-based interest rate …

The Criminal Class Action, Adam S. Zimmerman, David Jaros

All Faculty Scholarship

Over the past ten years, in a variety of high-profile corporate scandals, prosecutors have sought billions of dollars in restitution for crimes ranging from environmental dumping and consumer scams to financial fraud. In what we call “criminal class action” settlements, prosecutors distribute that money to groups of victims as in a civil class action while continuing to pursue the traditional criminal justice goals of retribution and deterrence.

Unlike civil class actions, however, the emerging criminal class action lacks critical safeguards for victims entitled to compensation. While prosecutors are encouraged, and even required by statute, to seek victim restitution, they lack …

Fortuity And Forensic Familial Identification, Natalie Ram

All Faculty Scholarship

On July 7, 2010, Los Angeles police announced the arrest of a suspect in the Grim Sleeper murders, so called because of a decade-long hiatus in killings. The break in the case came when California searched its state DNA database for a genetic profile similar, but not identical, to the killer’s. DNA is inherited in specific and predictable ways, so a source-excluding partial match might indicate that a close genetic relative of the matching offender was the Grim Sleeper. California’s apparent success in this case has intensified interest in policymaking for source-excluding partial matching. To date, however, little information about …

Big Brother Is Watching: The Reality Show You Didn't Audition For, J. Amy Dillard

All Faculty Scholarship

In 1984, at the height of the Reagan-era war on drugs, the Supreme Court created a bright-line exception to Fourth Amendment protection by declaring that no person had a reasonable expectation of privacy in an area defined as an open field. When it created the exception, the Court ignored positive law and its own jurisprudence that the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. The open fields doctrine allows law enforcement officers to enter posted, private areas that are not part of a house or its curtilage for brief surveillance. The Supreme Court has never “extended the open fields doctrine to …

Review Of A Final Accounting, Holocaust Survivors And Swiss Banks, Adeen Postar

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Punitive Damages Vs. The Death Penalty: In Search Of A Unified Approach To Jury Discretion And Due Process Of Law, José F. Anderson

All Faculty Scholarship

The role of the jury in awarding monetary damages to plaintiffs in a wide range of civil cases has captured the attention of the media, contemporary non-fiction writers, and reform-minded politicians in recent years. Particular attention has been focused on huge jury awards, which has led many commentators to criticize the wisdom of permitting juries to move so much money from one place to another. Although the right to a jury trial, and with it the exercise of broad judicial discretion, is constitutionally based, many reform efforts have moved toward removing juries from cases both as to the subject matter …

Linton Reversed: Indirect Gifts And The Step Transaction Doctrine, Wendy G. Gerzog

All Faculty Scholarship

The Ninth Circuit recently reversed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the government in Linton on the issues of indirect gift and the applicability of the step transaction doctrine. The circuit court’s analysis focused on the taxpayers’ donative intent. With that emphasis, the Ninth Circuit remanded the case to the district court to determine the sequence of the relevant transactions.

And Death Shall Have No Dominion: How To Achieve The Categorical Exemption Of Mentally Retarded Defendants From Execution, J. Amy Dillard

All Faculty Scholarship

This article examines the Court’s categorical exclusion of mentally retarded defendants from execution and explores how trial courts should employ procedures to accomplish heightened reliability in the mental retardation determination; it maintains that if a mentally retarded defendant is subjected to a death sentence then the Atkins directive has been ignored. To satisfy the Atkins Court’s objective of protecting mentally retarded defendants from the “special risk of wrongful execution,” the article explores whether trial courts should engage in a unified, pre-trial competency assessment in all capital cases where the defendant asserts mental retardation as a bar to execution and how …

Presidential Memories: Lincoln's Relationship With The Jews - Remembered On President's Day, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

This article examines the relationship President Abraham Lincoln had with members of the Jewish faith.

Ever since George Washington, U.S. presidents have made inclusive gestures toward Jewish-American citizens and soldiers, but only Abraham Lincoln, whose 291st birthday we celebrated last week, ever officially intervened on their behalf. He did it twice within the span of two years. During his political career Lincoln had many Jewish associates, advisers and supporters.

During the Civil War General Grant issued General Order No. 11, which is also discussed. This order was a result of Grant’s perception that Jews were participating in a black market …

Civilizing American Civil Justice: International Insights, James Maxeiner, Gyooho Lee, Armin Weber

All Faculty Scholarship

In 1776, when Americans declared independence from Britain, they also declared their rights. Their declarations of rights count “open courts” as among the best means for constitutional development. Open courts should secure to every man, without regard to wealth, a just remedy for every wrong suffered, according to the law of the land, by fair and speedy procedure.

Since 1776 Americans have invested heavily in creating open courts. They have been disappointed by returns that fall “far short of perfection” (Maurice Rosenberg). They have found reform to be an “unending effort to perfect the imperfect” (Jay Tidmarsh).

That Americans have …

Overcoming Under-Compensation And Under-Deterrence In Intentional Tort Cases: Are Statutory Multiple Damages The Best Remedy?, Stephen J. Shapiro

All Faculty Scholarship

This Article advocates that states' statutes make greater and more systematic use of multiple damages by extending them to a much broader range of intentional, wrongful conduct. Part II of this Article will explain why extra-compensatory relief is called for when tortious conduct is intentional or malicious. Part III will compare punitive damages, attorney fees, and treble or other multiple damages as possible sources of additional relief. Part IV will focus on multiple damages. The Article will examine the range of existing state statutes and discuss why and how those statutes might be extended to a broader range of wrongful …

Can Congress Make A President Step Up A War?, Charles Tiefer

All Faculty Scholarship

May Congress use its appropriation power to direct the President to step up a war? When Congress uses its spending power for intensifying a war-stepping it up, pressing it more aggressively-against the resistance of a "less hawkish" Commander in Chief, who wins?

This Article posits differences of view in the 2010s toward the Afghanistan war as a way to revisit, generally, the history of constitutional disputes over war-related appropriation riders. Describing the differences in very simplistic terms, a "hawkish" opposition in Congress may gain political strength at any time, such as in 2010 or 2014, not necessarily because of the …

"Sweet Childish Days": Using Developmental Psychology Research In Evaluating The Admissibility Of Out-Of-Court Statements By Young Children, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

A three-year-old child, while being bathed by her babysitter, innocently mentions that her “pee-pee” hurts. When the babysitter asks the child how she hurt it, she says, “Uncle Ernie (her mother’s boyfriend) told me not to tell.” A subsequent medical examination reveals that the child has gonorrhea, a sexually transmitted disease.

By the time of trial, the child is four and-a-half-years old. When questioned by the trial judge, she cannot explain to the judge’s satisfaction, “the difference between the truth and a lie.” Moreover, she has no long term memory of the incident. The judge rules the child incompetent to …

Response: Metaphor And Meaning In Trawling For Herring, Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

In this essay responding to Professor Jennifer Laurin’s essay, Trawling for Herring: Lessons in Doctrinal Borrowing and Convergence, I advance Laurin’s project of recovering the exclusionary rule’s lost lineage through a critical reflection upon her doctrinal metaphors. Specifically, I parse the jurisprudential significance of Laurin’s idea of “trawling” in order to understand Herring v. United States and show how this metaphor successfully builds upon a second water-based metaphor animating Laurin’s analysis — the “hydraulics” of borrowing and convergence. By attending to both Laurin’s specific exclusionary rule arguments and to how Laurin’s conceptualization of “hydraulics” extends Professors Tebbe and Tsai’s constitutional …

The Viability Of Multi-Party Litigation As A Tool For Social Engineering Six Decades After The Restrictive Covenant Cases, José F. Anderson

All Faculty Scholarship

Six decades ago, a group of lawyers sought ways to overturn the racially restrictive covenants that were common across the United States. These restrictions on integrated neighborhoods were the first legal battleground of the civil rights movement using the courts of civil justice to remove what many thought were immoral restrictions on the rights of free people. The most famous of those cases was Shelley v. Kraemer, but the doctrine that emerged from that particular case was actually a series of separate, multi-party lawsuits in various locations, using teams of lawyers acting in concert with each other to achieve justice. …