Conflict of Laws Commons^™

Choice Of Law In Ohio: Two Steps Routinely Missed, Richard S. Walinski

Akron Law Review

At last tally, courts in fewer than half of the states look to the Restatement (Second) Conflict of Laws for any part of their choice-of-law rules. Ohio, however, is in the minority that does. In fact, Ohio has endorsed the Restatement (Second) with surprising enthusiasm. The Supreme Court of Ohio took the unusual step of announcing in 1984 and again in 2007 that it has “adopted” the Restatement (Second) “in its entirety” for resolution of all conflict-of-law questions that arise in this state.

Despite the court’s wholesale endorsement of the Restatement (Second), the courts of Ohio—including the supreme court itself—do …

Rights Of State Prisoners - Federal Court Intervention In State Prison Administration; Jones V. Wittenberg, Ronald L. Collins

Akron Law Review

The path to federal court intervention into state prison administration has been a tortuous and rocky one.... Jones v. Wittenberg carries federal court intervention into state prison administration to new lengths. Until more basic and lasting changes are made on the part of society and the states, such intervention seems to be the best chance for ameliorating conditions in our state penal systems.

Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure; Statute Of Limitations; State Policy; Relation Back; Marshall V. Mulrenin, Gary I. Kruger

Akron Law Review

Some federal courts have followed the rule that amendments to correct misnomer or misdescription of a defendant will relate back where the proper defendant is in court. An amendment which substitutes or adds a new party, however, creates a new cause of action, and under such circumstances, there is normally no relation back to original filing for purposes of limitations.' Since the 1966 amendment of rule 15(c), however, a number of courts have permitted amendments substituting defendants after the statute of limitations has run.

Death Penalty; Cruel And Unusual Punishment; Individualized Sentencing Determination; Lockett V. Ohio; Bell V. Ohio, James C. Ellerhorst

Akron Law Review

“In Bell v. Ohio and Lockett v. Ohio the United States Supreme Court found the sentencing provisions of the Ohio capital punishment statute to be incompatible with the eighth and fourteenth amendments which prohibit cruel and unusual punishment. These two opinions represent the most recent attempt by the Supreme Court to explain what elements must be included in a constitutionally valid capital punishment statute.”

Commerce Clause; Privileges And Immunities Clause; State Hiring; Discrimination Against Nonresidents; Hicklin V. Orbeck, Donna N. Kemp

Akron Law Review

"In Hicklin v. Orbeck, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held' that Alaska's statute entitled "Local Hire Under State Leases"' violates the Constitution due to its discriminatory effect on nonresidents. Basing its decision on the Privileges and Immunities Clause,' the Court found that there was insufficient justification for the extensive discrimination against nonresidents required by the Act because the unemployment problem to be alleviated by the legislation was not due to a great influx of nonresident jobseekers. Rather, the Court attributed the problem to the fact that a large percentage of the unemployed in Alaska lack sufficient education and job …

In Rem Jurisdiction; Attachment Of Insurance Debts; State Statutes; O'Connorv. Lee-Hy Paving Corp., Eloise Lubbinge Mackus

Akron Law Review

The United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, in O'Connor v. Lee-Hy Paving Corp., upheld New York's insurance attachment procedure which serves as a vehicle for gaining personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants in causes of action that arise outside of New York. The court thereby determined that New York federal courts, in applying the procedures, had not violated defendant's due process because the minimum contacts requirement of the recent United Stated Supreme Court case, Shaffer v. Heitner, had been met.

Constitutional Federalism Revisited: Garcia V. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, Leslie Ann Iams

Akron Law Review

Constitutional federalism is the basis on which the United States government was created. However, the concept of constitutional federalism has not yet been clearly defined, and as a consequence, conflicting viewpoints on federalism have arisen. These conflicting viewpoints are best illustrated by the law concerning the commerce clause.

With the recent expansion of the commerce clause, the United States Supreme Court was faced with defining constitutional federalism, in order to evaluate the legitimacy of commerce clause legislation. The task of defining constitutional federalism, however, only served to create a dispute over federalism among the Supreme Court Justices. In 1985, the …

Forum Shopping For Stale Claims: Statutes Of Limitations And Conflict Of Laws, Sam Walker

Akron Law Review

This article, however, has a modest goal. It will not argue for rationality or for a new interests analysis, as some scholars have done, or for consistency or for the adoption of one or the other of the proposed solutions. It will review the interstate and international aspects of statutes of limitations and examine the unique role of statute "havens" focusing not on criticism, but prediction. The most recent decisions by the United States, New Hampshire and Mississippi Supreme Courts indicate that discussion of what will, or what could, happen may be more valuable than discussion of what should happen …

Shari'ah Law As National Security Threat?, Cyra Akila Choudhury

Akron Law Review

The Article proceeds in three parts: in Part II, the Article describes three anti-shari’ah measures. It describes Oklahoma’s Save Our State amendment to show how these laws target Islam. It also reviews the recent decision by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirming the grant of a preliminary injunction against the certification of Oklahoma’s constitutional amendment. It then describes Arizona’s law that targets shari’ah as well as other legal traditions. It also examines the original version of the Tennessee bill to illustrate the motivations behind the revised, watered down version that was eventually passed by the legislature. Part II concludes …

Defining The Wingspan Of The Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Ashley R. Fiest

Akron Law Review

This Comment will focus on the widely different interpretations, applications, and enforcement of the MBTA and the consequences that will result if a concrete solution is not implemented soon. Part II will discuss the background, historically and legislatively, that led to the enactment of the MBTA and its current implementation. Part III will discuss the current conflict within the courts regarding how the MBTA is to be applied. In discussing this conflict, this section looks at the particular reasoning behind two of the most recent decisions on this issue and what led each of the courts to different interpretations. Part …

Recent Reforms In Eu Law: Recognition And Enforcement Of Judgments, Samuel P. Baumgartner

Akron Law Faculty Publications

The European Union has just adopted a set of amendments to the Brussels I Regulation, which governs jurisdiction to adjudicate, parallel proceedings, and the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. This article discusses the Regulation and the adopted amendments regarding the recognition and enforcement of judgments and argues that these amendments are part of a deeper set of structural and conceptual changes in the law of transnational litigation in the European Union over the last two decades. The article concludes with an analysis of both the amendments and the underlying changes for litigants and law reformers in the United States, …

Understanding The Obstacles To The Recognition And Enforcement Of U.S. Judgments Abroad, Samuel P. Baumgartner

Akron Law Faculty Publications

Questions of recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments have entered center stage. Recent empirical work suggests that there has been a marked increase in the frequency with which U.S. courts are asked to recognize and enforce foreign judgments. The U.S. litigation surrounding a multibillion-dollar Ecuadoran judgment against Chevron indicates that the stakes in some of these cases can be high indeed. This rising importance of questions of judgments recognition has not been lost on lawmakers. In November of 2011, the Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law of the U.S. House of Representatives’ Judiciary Committee held hearings on whether to …

Changes In The European Union's Regime Of Recognizing And Enforcing Judgments And Transnational Litigation In The United States, Samuel P. Baumgartner

Akron Law Faculty Publications

The European Commission has proposed to amend (recast) the Brussels I Regulation, which governs jurisdiction to adjudicate, parallel proceedings, and judgments recognition within the European Union. Although much of the Brussels I Regulation is simply the 1968 Brussels Convention cast into European Union legislation, the proposed amendments are part of a deeper set of structural and conceptual changes in the law of transnational litigation within the Union over the past couple of decades. Understanding these changes is essential to understanding what drives the proposed amendments and what is likely to follow.

In this paper – presented at the symposium Our …