Law Commons^™

Making Stuff Up, Richard H. Underwood

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Beginning with an article in this Journal almost thirty years ago, Professor Underwood continues to research and write about legal ethics and litigation. In this Commentary, he offers a witty look at several cases where, in his opinion, the judge allowed improper arguments to the jury.

Ten-Step Guide To Oral Argument For Junior Attorneys, David A. Grenardo

Faculty Articles

Understanding what is necessary to argue effectively is important for junior attorneys to make compelling oral arguments. They must be persuasive, prepared, and precise. By following this 10-step guide, junior attorneys can maximize their opportunity to litigate and represent their clients’ interests.

First, tell the judge why you are there and what you want. Judges are extremely busy and may have hundreds of cases on their docket. Next, anticipate arguments and counterarguments that may be made by the parties and the court. Anticipating potential arguments aids in preparation prior to the hearing. Be responsive and respectful to the judge. Take …

The Blue Wall Of Silence Strengthened & Distrust By Minorities Of The Police Emboldened By A Judge’S Ruling (Officer Ardelean And The Deaths Of Mr. Flores & Mr. Luganas), Christopher C. Cooper Dr.

Christopher C. Cooper Dr.

On June 4, 2010, when Chicago Police Officer John Ardelean walked out of a Chicago courthouse a free man, in the face of evidence that he was drunk when he crashed his SUV and caused the deaths of two Mexican-American men, it became clear that more than 39 years Post Serpico police reform in the United States was undone in one morning court hearing. For obvious reasons, Ardelean’s case has garnered national attention because of the judge’s comments and ruling. In particular, the judge’s disturbingly harsh criticism of the police lieutenant who ordered Officer Ardelean arrested for drunk driving. Public …

7th Circuit Judge Establishes Chambers At Law School, Karen Sloan

Lauren Robel (2002 Acting; 2003-2011)

No abstract provided.

Improving Federal Judicial Selection, Carl Tobias

University of Richmond Law Review

Part I descriptively analyzes the volume. Part II evaluates the many insights Wittes contributes to readers' appreciation of contemporary federal judicial selection. Part III details numerous recommendations.

Judge Or Jury? Determining Deception Or Misrepresentation Under The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Christian Stueben

Fordham Law Review

This Note explores the conflict among the federal circuit courts as to whether a judge or jury should decide if the language contained in a collection letter is false, misleading, or deceptive to the least sophisticated consumer under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). Some circuits, such as the Second and Ninth Circuits, hold that this issue is a question of law, appropriate for the judge to decide. In contrast, the Seventh Circuit finds this to be a question of fact, and requires the plaintiff to submit extrinsic evidence in the form of professional surveys in order to reach …

The Other Avenues Of Hall Street And Prospects For Judicial Review Of Arbitral Awards, Maureen A. Weston Prof.

Maureen A Weston

In Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) provided the exclusive grounds for judicial vacatur and modification of arbitral awards covered under the Act. In so ruling, the Court rejected the contention that the FAA’s requirement to enforce arbitration contracts as written includes private contracts that seek to expand the scope of judicial review beyond the grounds enumerated in the FAA. Despite holding that parties cannot expand a court’s power to review an arbitration award under the FAA, the Court alluded to the possibility of “other possible avenues” for …