Courts Commons^™

Foreseeing Greatness? Measurable Performance Criteria And The Selection Of Supreme Court Justices, James J. Brudney

The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law Working Paper Series

This article contributes to an ongoing debate about the feasibility and desireability of measuring the "merit" of appellate judges--and their consequent Supreme Court potential--by using objective performance variables. Relying on the provocative and controversial "tournament criteria" proposed by Professors Stephen Choi and Mitu Gulati in two recent articles, Brudney assesses the "Supreme Court potential" of Warren Burger and Harry Blackmun based on their appellate court records. He finds that Burger's appellate performance appears more promising under the Choi and Gulati criteria, but then demonstrates how little guidance these quantitative assessments actually provide when reviewing the two men's careers on the …

Between Dialogue And Decree: International Review Of National Courts, Robert B. Ahdieh

Faculty Scholarship

Recent years have seen dramatic growth in the number of international tribunals at work across the globe, from the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, to the Claims Resolution Tribunal for Dormant Claims in Switzerland and the International Criminal Court. With this development has come both increased opportunity for interaction between national and international courts and increased occasion for conflict. Such friction was evident in the recent decision in Loewen Group, Inc. v. United States, in which an arbitral panel constituted under the North American Free Trade Agreement found …

Procedural Due Process Aspects Of District Of Columbia Eviction Procedures, Lynn E. Cunningham

ExpressO

The District of Columbia Superior Court, Landlord and Tenant Branch, administers the local Forcible Entry and Detainer statute in a manner that arguably violates standards of adequate notice under the Due Process Clause.

The Iceberg Of Religious Freedom: Subsurface Levels Of Nonestablishment Discourse, Steven Douglas Smith

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

This article discusses three levels of disagreement in establishment clause discourse– or what may be called the “lawyerly,” the “constitutive” (or “culture wars”), and the “philosophical” (or perhaps the “theological”) levels. Disagreement at the first of these levels is everywhere apparent in the way lawyers and justices and scholars write and argue; disagreement at the second level is somewhat less obtrusive but still easily discernible; disagreement at the third level is almost wholly beneath the surface. The manifest indeterminacy of lawyerly arguments suggests that in this area, premises are more likely to be derived from favored conclusions, not the other …

School Funding Litigation: Who's Winning The War?, John Dayton, Anne Dupre

Vanderbilt Law Review

Much is being made this year in education law circles and elsewhere about the fiftieth anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education.' The Brown decision has certainly left an indelible mark on schools and other institutions in the United States. But last year the thirtieth anniversary of another major Supreme Court opinion passed largely without comment, despite the fact that it may be the most significant decision regarding public schools since Brown. In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court, in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, concluded that education was not a fundamental right and that disparities in school funding …

The Promise Of Equality: Reflections On The Post-Brown Era In Virginia, Robert R. Mehrige Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Civil Practice And Procedure, John R. Walk

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Family And Juvenile Law, Robert E. Shepherd Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Experimental Purpose Doctrine And Biomedical Research, Tao Huang

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

The experimental use doctrine is a common law rule in patent law that until a few years ago excused accused infringers who made and used patented products or processes on the basis of an experimental, educational, or nonprofit purpose when there was de minimis economic injury to the patent owner and de minimis economic gain to the infringer. While the application of the experimental purpose doctrine was always narrow, two recent Federal Circuit decisions indicate that there is not much left under its aegis. In Madey v. Duke University, the Federal Circuit strictly limited the application of the experimental purpose …

Electronic Discovery Sanctions In The Twenty-First Century, Shira A. Scheindlin, Kachana Wangkeo

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

At the federal level, the Civil Rules Advisory Committee has responded to the "unique and necessary feature of computer systems--the automatic recycling, overwriting, and alteration of electronically stored information"--with a proposed amendment to Rule 37. The proposed Rule 37(f) would shield litigants from sanctions for the destruction of electronic data if the party "took reasonable steps to preserve the information after it knew or should have known the information was discoverable in the action" and "the failure resulted from the loss of the information because of the routine operation of the party's electronic information system." The safe harbor provision would …

Getting To Know Us: Judicial Outreach In Oregon, Mary J. Deits, Lora E. Keenan

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Minnesota's Pro Bono Appellate Program: A Simple Approach That Achieves Important Objectives, Thomas H. Boyd

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

The Illusion Of Devil's Advocacy: How The Justices Of The Supreme Court Foreshadow Their Decisions During Oral Argument, Sarah Levien Shullman

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel In Parental-Rights Termination Cases: The Challenge For Appellate Courts, Susan Calkins

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Federal And State Court Rules Governing Publication And Citation Of Opinions: An Update, Melissa M. Serfass, Jessie Wallace Cranford

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Why Were Perry Mason's Clients Always Innocent? The Criminal Lawyer's Moral Dilemma - The Criminal Defendant Who Tells His Lawyer He Is Guilty, Randolph Braccialarghe

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Structuring Sentencing: Apprendi, The Offense Of Conviction, And The Limited Role Of Constitutional Law, Benjamin J. Priester

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Foreword: Rethinking Reconstruction After Iraq, Diane Marie Amann

Scholarly Works

Foreword to a symposium held on March 12, 2004 by the UC Davis Journal of International Law & Policy. Entitled “Rethinking Reconstruction After Iraq,” the symposium was designated a regional meeting of the American Society of International Law and the American Branch of the International Law Association, and further was sponsored by the American National Section of the International Association of Penal Law and the International Human Rights Committee of the Bar Association of San Francisco.

Statutory Interpretation In Econotopia, Nathan B. Oman

Faculty Publications

Much of the debate in the recent revival of interest in statutory interpretation centers on whether or not courts should use legislative history in construing statutes. The consensus in favor of this practice has come under sharp attack from public choice critics who argue that traditional models of legislative intent are positively and normatively incoherent. This paper argues that in actual practice, courts look at a fairly narrow subset of legislative history. By thinking about the power to write that legislative history as a property right and legislatures as markets, it is possible to use Coase's Theorem and the concept …

An End Of Term Exam: October Term 2003 At The Supreme Court Of The United States, Peter B. Rutledge, Nicole L. Angarella

Scholarly Works

The goal of this Essay is to provide a resource of digestible proportions that any Court watcher (judge, lawyer, professor, student) can use to inform himself or herself about current developments at the Court. While the Essay discusses how the current Term compares to past ones, it does not do so simply as an exercise in dry social science. Instead, it highlights those trends of interest to both the scholar and the practitioner. Likewise, while the Essay discusses particular cases, it does not simply summarize facts and holdings. Instead, it places those doctrinal developments in a larger context, analyzes them, …

Terminating Calder: "Effects" Based Jurisdiction In The Ninth Circuit After Schwarzenegger V. Fred Martin Motor Co., A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

In Calder v. Jones, the Supreme Court clearly and succinctly determined that personal jurisdiction is appropriate over a defendant whose only contact with the forum state is its intentional actions aimed at and having harmful "effects" in the forum state. Illustrating the extent to which the law of personal jurisdiction had been relaxed from the time of Pennoyer v. Neff and International Shoe Co. v. Washington, Calder also extended the reach of state courts by permitting jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants on the strength of the plaintiffs' connections with the forum state. Although Calder provided a welcome and much …

Theater In The Courtroom, The Chicago Conspiracy Trial, Pnina Lahav

Faculty Scholarship

The Chicago Conspiracy Trial (otherwise known as the Chicago Seven Trial) is a Rorschach test of American society in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Following the riots at the Democratic Convention in Chicago in 1968, leaders of the antiwar movement, the counterculture and the Black Panthers were put on trial for a "conspiracy to cross state lines with intent to incite a riot." The trial has been too easily dismissed as a circus, not worthy of legal attention, when in fact it does contain important legal insights. This paper suggests that the theory of the theater provides the key …

How Like A Winter? The Plight Of Absent Class Members Denied Adequate Representation, Susan P. Koniak

Faculty Scholarship

Class actions assume absent class members. ² Notices in class actions tell class members that they need not show up in the courthouse, although they may if they choose.³ Class members are told that class counsel and the named class representatives will look out for them, although if they choose to hire their own lawyer, she may appear on their behalf.⁴ They are also routinely told that once the decision in the class action becomes final they will be bound by it, losing any and all right to protest the resolution of their claims by the class action …

Historical Links: The Remarkable Legacy And Legal Journey Of The Honorable Julia Cooper Mack, Inez Smith Reid

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Ethics Of The Adversary System, Greg S. Sergienko

ExpressO

This article considers many commonly advanced criticisms of the adversary system. It provides an analytic framework that includes the likely results of changed ethical rules and that distinguishes and analyzes separately two different possible goals of the system, seeking the truth and promoting justice. The article is also unusual in the range of supporting materials that it synthesizes, which includes contributions from economic theory, psychological studies, philosophy, and traditional legal ethics.

The article concludes that changes in ethical codes meant to increase lawyers' duty to promote the truth will have a perverse result, decreasing the accuracy of litigation. This will …

Judges As Rulemakers, Larry A. Alexander, Emily Sherwin

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

This essay analyzes and compares different approaches to the problem of legal precedent. If judges reasoned flawlessly, the ideal approach to precedent would give prior judicial opinions only the weight they naturally carry in moral reasoning. Given that judges are not perfect reasoners, the best approach to precedent is one that treats rules established in prior decisions as authoritative for later judges. In comparison to the natural model of precedent, a rule-based model minimizes error. A rule-based model is also superior to several popular attempts at compromise, which call on judges to reason from the results of prior cases or …

Strategic Judicial Lawmaking: An Empirical Investigation Of Ideology And Publication On The U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit, David S. Law

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

Previous studies have demonstrated that, in a number of contexts, federal appeals court judges divide along ideological lines when deciding cases upon the merits. To date, however, researchers have failed to find evidence that circuit judges take advantage of selective publication rules to further their ideological preferences - for example, by voting more ideologically in published cases that have precedential effect than in unpublished cases that lack binding effect upon future panels. This article evaluates the possibility that judges engage in strategic judicial lawmaking by voting more ideologically in published cases than in unpublished cases. To test this hypothesis, all …

The Hollowness Of The Harm Principle, Steven D. Smith

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

Among the various instruments in the toolbox of liberalism, the so-called “harm principle,” presented as the central thesis of John Stuart Mill’s classic On Liberty, has been one of the most popular. The harm principle has been widely embraced and invoked in both academic and popular debate about a variety of issues ranging from obscenity to drug regulation to abortion to same-sex marriage, and its influence is discernible in legal arguments and judicial opinions as well. Despite the principle’s apparent irresistibility, this essay argues that the principle is hollow. It is an empty vessel, alluring but without any inherent legal …

Supermajority Rules And The Judicial Confirmation Process, Michael B. Rappaport, John O. Mcginnis

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

In this paper we assess the effect of possible supermajority rules on the now contentious Senate confirmation process for judges. We deploy a formula for evaluating supermajority rules that we have developed in other papers. First, we consider a sixty-vote rule in the Senate for the confirmation of federal judges–an explicit version of the supermajority norm that may be emerging from the filibuster. While we briefly discuss how such a rule would affect the project of maximizing the number of originalist judges, for the most part we evaluate the rule on the realist assumption that judges will pursue their own …

Competency To Stand Trial On Trial, Grant H. Morris, Ansar M. Haroun, David Naimark

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

This Article considers the legal standards for the determination of competency to stand trial, and whether those standards are understood and applied by psychiatrists and psychologists in the forensic evaluations they perform and in the judgments they make–judgments that are routinely accepted by trial courts as their own judgments. The Article traces the historical development of the competency construct and the development of two competency standards. One standard, used today in eight states that contain 25% of the population of the United States, requires that the defendant be able to assist counsel in the conduct of a defense “in a …