Law Commons^™

Confronting Supreme Court Fact Finding, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Resolving Mass Legal Disputes Through Class Arbitration: The United States And Canada Compared, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

This article compares three issues that have arisen as a result of recent Supreme Court decisions in both countries: the circumstances in which class arbitration is available; the procedures that must or may be used; and the nature of the right to proceed as a class. In so doing, the article not only offers valuable lessons to parties in the U.S. and Canada, but also provides observers from other countries with a useful framework for considering issues relating to the intersection between collective relief and arbitration.

Hierarchy And Heterogeneity: How To Read A Statute In A Lower Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Faculty Publications

Is statutory interpretation an activity that all courts should perform the same way? Courts and commentators implicitly so conclude. I believe that conclusion is wrong. Statutory interpretation is a court-specific activity that should differ according to the institutional circumstances of the interpreting court. The U.S. Supreme Court is not the model all other courts should emulate.

I identify three kinds of institutional differences between courts that bear on which interpretive methods are appropriate: (1) the court’s place in the hierarchical structure of appellate review, (2) the court’s technical capacity and resources, and (3) the court’s democratic pedigree, particularly as reflected …

The Revolution In Family Law Dispute Resolution, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

This article surveys a wide range of procedures that divorcing parties now use, including self-representation. Lawyers sometimes provide “unbundled” legal services to help parties who want to divide responsibilities for legal tasks between themselves and their lawyers. Parties often use mediation, arbitration, and private judging. Norms for lawyers’ professional roles have emphasized the importance of cooperation and some lawyers offer “planned early negotiation” processes such as Collaborative and Cooperative Law. Family courts engage in a wide range of activities beyond traditional litigation and adjudication. Many courts manage or mandate parent education and services related to domestic violence. Courts regularly appoint …

Faa Law, Without The Activism: What If The Bellwether Cases Were Decided By A Truly Conservative Court, Richard C. Reuben

Faculty Publications

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided an extraordinary number of cases under the Federal Arbitration Act in the last half century, a pattern that continues today at the pace of a case or two a year. During this time, Republican presidential candidates have made much political hay out of the Supreme Court, running against the Warren Court’s “liberal activism” by promising to appoint judges who would decide cases more conservatively. In this article, I analyze whether this promise has been fulfilled in the context of the Supreme Court’s FAA jurisprudence by identifying the core principles of judicial conservatism – restraint, …

Navigating The Borders Between International Commercial Arbitration And U.S. Federal Courts: A Jurisprudential Gps, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

This article provides just that sort of guide, outlining the various ways in which U.S. federal courts can become involved in international commercial arbitration and introducing both basic and advanced concepts in a straightforward, practical manner. However, this article provides more than just an overview. Instead, it discusses relevant issues on a motion-by-motion basis, helping readers find immediate answers to their questions while also getting a picture of the field as a whole. Written especially for busy lawyers, this article gives practitioners, arbitrators and new and infrequent participants in international commercial arbitration a concise but comprehensive understanding of the unique …

Africa And The International Criminal Court: Collision Course Or Cooperation?, Charles Chernor Jalloh

Faculty Publications

The relationship between Africa and the International Criminal Court (ICC) was cordial for many years. However, since the decisions of the United Nations Security Council to invoke its special powers to impose the Court on Sudan and Libya, African States acting through their regional body - the African Union - have adopted numerous resolutions claiming that the ICC maybe impeding, rather than assisting, their efforts to restore peace in several ongoing conflicts and transitional situations on the continent. In this invited lecture, given as the first RJR Distinguished Visiting Professor Lecture at North Carolina Central University School of Law in …

The Anti-Messiness Principle In Statutory Interpretation, Anita S. Krishnakumar

Faculty Publications

Many of the Supreme Court's statutory interpretation opinions reflect a juisprudential aversion to interpreting statutes in a manner that will prove "messy" for implementing courts to administer. Yet the practice of construing statutes to avoid "messiness" has gone largely unnoticed in the statutory interpretation literature. This Article seeks to illuminate the Court's use of "anti-messiness" arguments to interpret statutes and to bring theoretical attention to the principle of "messiness" avoidance. The Article begins by defining the concept of anti-messiness and providing a typology of common anti-messiness arguments used by the Supreme Court. It then considers some dangers inherent in the …

Confronting Coventurers: Coconspirator Hearsay, Sir Walter Raleigh, And The Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause, Ben L. Trachtenberg

Faculty Publications

Using the example of a recent major terrorism prosecution, this article addresses “coventurer hearsay” in the context of the ongoing Confrontation Clause debate concerning the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Crawford v. Washington. Courts have recently begun admitting hearsay evidence pursuant to a revisionist interpretation of the coconspirator statement exception to the hearsay rule. Under the new “lawful joint venture” theory, a hearsay statement may be admitted as a coconspirator statement if made in furtherance of a “joint undertaking” - defined as pretty much any cooperative activity - even if the “conspiracy” is not illegal. Because this new interpretation …