Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Pay Now, Play Later?: Youth And Adolescent Collision Sports, Vivian E. Hamilton
Pay Now, Play Later?: Youth And Adolescent Collision Sports, Vivian E. Hamilton
Faculty Publications
The routine and repeated head impacts experienced by athletes in a range of sports can inflict microscopic brain injuries that accumulate over time, even in the absence of concussion. Indeed, cumulative exposure to head impacts—not number of concussions—is the strongest predictor of sports-related degenerative brain disease in later life. The observable symptoms of disease appear years or decades after initial injury and resemble those of other mental-health conditions such as depression and dementia. The years-long interval between earlier, seemingly minor, head impacts and later brain disease has long obscured the connection between the two.
Risk of injury differs across demographics, …
Out Of The Quandary: Personal Jurisdiction Over Absent Class Member Claims Explained, A. Benjamin Spencer
Out Of The Quandary: Personal Jurisdiction Over Absent Class Member Claims Explained, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
Since the Supreme Court's decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County, litigants and lower courts have wrestled with the issue of whether a federal court must be able to exercise personal jurisdiction with respect to each of the claims asserted by absent class members in a class action and, if so, what standard governs that jurisdictional determination. This issue is rapidly coming to a head and is poised for inevitable resolution by the Supreme Court in the near future; multiple circuit courts have heard appeals from district courts that have reached varying conclusions on …
Offensive Non-Mutual Issue Preclusion Revisited, Edward D. Cavanagh
Offensive Non-Mutual Issue Preclusion Revisited, Edward D. Cavanagh
Faculty Publications
(Excerpt)
Some forty years ago, in Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore, the United States Supreme Court held that the rule of mutuality of estoppel was no longer an absolute bar to the invocation of issue preclusion for the benefit of a plaintiff who had been a stranger to the prior (F-1) litigation against a defendant who had been party to both the F-I and present (F-2) cases. In so ruling, the Supreme Court gave its imprimatur to Judge Traynor's dramatic takedown of the mutuality rule in Bernhard v. Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association nearly four decades …