Law Commons^™

Case Comment: Heller V. Uber Technologies Inc., Peter Quon

Dalhousie Law Journal

Canadian courts have accepted mandatory arbitration clauses as presumptively enforceable unless there is legislation that precludes their application. This position was confirmed by the Supreme Court in Seidel v. TEL US CommunicationsInc. In Heller v. Uber Technologies Inc., the Ontario Court of Appeal considered an arbitration clause in the context of legislation following the approach in Seidel, but the Court also undertook an unconscionability analysis. Reviewing a motion that was granted to stay a class action proceeding in favour of an arbitration clause, the Court unanimously held that the clause was invalid on two separate grounds. First, the arbitration clause …

Duets, Not Solos: The Mclachlin Court's Co-Authorship Legacy, Peter Mccormick

Dalhousie Law Journal

This article explores the recentphenomenon of the formal co-authorship of Supreme Court decisions. It begins with a short history of the practice, primarily in the closing years of the Lamer Court but expanding steadily under McLachlin. A closer investigation reveals two critically important dimensions: first, the practice is skewed toward the Court's more important decisions (measured in terms of subject matter legal complexity, interveners, and subsequent citation); and second, its diffusion across the Court's membership refutes the possibility that it simply reinforces persisting cleavages. This new practice represents a more overtly collegial format directed to the Court's more significant decisions. …

Juvenile Status Offenses: The Prejudicial Underpinnings Of The Juvenile Justice System, Zachary Auspitz

University of Miami Race & Social Justice Law Review

No abstract provided.

Re-Sentencing Reform: A Comparative Analysis Of The Juvenile Justice System In The United States, United Kingdom, Colombia And Australia, Vianca I. Picart

ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Looking For Venue In The Patently Right Places: A Parallel Study Of The Venue Act And Venue In Anda Litigation, Mengke Xing

San Diego Law Review

Like any other type of litigation, venue is often an important strategic decision for patent infringement litigants. Under the traditional nation-wide venue rule, a patent owner was able to sue a corporate defendant almost in every district in the country, giving rise to abusive forum shopping and the popularity of the Eastern District of Texas. Last year, the Supreme Court in TC Heartland dramatically changed the legal framework of venue in patent litigation, while leaving some issues unaddressed. After a discussion of the evolvement of venue laws and the significance of TC Heartland, this Comment focuses on the Venue Equity …

Punitive Preemption And The First Amendment, Rachel Proctor May

San Diego Law Review

In recent years, state legislators have begun passing a new breed of “punitive” preemption laws–those that impose fines, civil and criminal sanctions, and other sanctions on local governments and their officials as a consequence of passing laws or enacting policies that are inconsistent with state laws. This represents a significant change from traditional preemption, under which a local government could enact laws based on its view of preempting state statutes and applicable state constitutional provisions and, if necessary, defend its interpretation in court. When punitive preemption prevents a local lawmaking process from taking place, the state forecloses a unique form …

The Paragraph 20 Paradox: An Evaluation Of The Enforcement Of Ethical Rules As Substantive Law, Donald E. Campbell

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

This Article addresses an issue courts across the country continue to struggle with: When are ethics rules appropriately considered enforceable substantive obligations, and when should they only be enforceable through the disciplinary process? The question is complicated by the ethics rules themselves. Paragraph 20 of the Scope section of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct includes seemingly contradictory guidance; it states the Rules are not to be used to establish civil liability, but also that they can be “some evidence” of a violation of a lawyer’s standard of care. Most states have adopted this paradoxal Paragraph 20 language. Consequently, courts …

“Who Will Judge The Many When The Game Isthrough?”: Considering The Profound Differencesbetween Mental Health Courts And “Traditional”Involuntary Civil Commitment Courts, Michael L. Perlin

Seattle University Law Review

For forty years, we have known that involuntary civil commitment hearings are—in most jurisdictions—“charades.” When the Supreme Court noted, in Parham v. J.R., that the average length of a civil commitment hearing ranged from 3.8 to 9.2 minutes, the reaction of many who had done these cases was, “What? So long?!” The characterization of such hearings as being a “greased runway” to a state institution has never been disputed. Lawyers representing these individuals were bored or contemptuous; judges simply wanted to get cases moving; opposing counsel looked at their wrist watches to see when the cases would be done. This …

Hearsay In The Smiley Face: Analyzing The Use Of Emojis As Evidence, Erin Janssen

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming

The Federal–State Standing Gap: How To Enforce Federal Law In Federal Court Without Article Iii Standing, Peter N. Salib, David K. Suska

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

You, too, can sue Donald Trump under the Emoluments Clause!

Since Inauguration Day, several lawsuits have been filed against President Trump because of his refusal to divest certain assets. They assert that Trump’s business interests conflict with the Emoluments Clause of Article I. That arcane provision forbids certain federal officials from accepting any perquisite or gain from a foreign monarch or state. The suits contend, for example, that a foreign dignitary’s booking of a room at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. would constitute an unlawful emolument.

Most commentators quickly threw cold water on the prospect of any plaintiff …

Foreseeably Unclear: The Meaning Of The "Reasonably Foreseeable" Criterion For Access To Medical Assistance In Dying In Canada, Jocelyn Downie, Kate Scallion

Dalhousie Law Journal

Canada's medical assistance in dying legislation contains the eligibility criterion "naturaldeath has become reasonably foreseeable." The phrase "reasonably foreseeable" is unfamiliar and unclear. As a result of ongoing confusion about its meaning, there is reason to be concerned that under- or over-inclusive interpretations of the phrase are adversely affecting access to MAID. With critical interests at stake (eg access to MAiD and potential criminal liability), it is essential that the meaning of the phrase be clarified. Furthermore, the meaning of "reasonably foreseeable" will be at issue in the Charter challenges to the federal MAiD legislation currently before the courts in …

Report Of The Maine Commission On Gender, Justice, And The Courts, Maine Commission On Gender, Justice, And The Courts

Maine Law Review

The Commission on Gender, Justice, and the Courts was established by the Maine Supreme Judicial Court in January 1993, pursuant to a resolution adopted by the Conference of Chief Justices in 1988 urging the creation of task forces to study gender bias and minority concerns within court systems. In recent years, forty-one states, the District of Columbia, and two federal circuits have established task forces on gender bias in the courts as part of a continuing effort to achieve equality for women and men in American society. These jurisdictions recognized that access to a neutral and unbiased court is essential …

One Judge's Legacy And The New York Court Of Appeals: Mr. Justice Cardozo And The Law Of Contracts, Meredith R. Miller

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.