Judges Commons^™

Should State Trial Courts Become Laboratories Of Upl Reform?, Bruce A. Green

Fordham Law Review

There is a growing “access to justice” movement that is principally driven by lawyers and judges. It has multiple objectives. One such objective is to make state court proceedings fairer, more reliable, and more accessible. This is important because state courts have a significant impact on peoples’ lives. They are where family members lose custody of children, where property owners obtain permission to evict tenants, where creditors are empowered to repossess people’s cars or garnish their wages, and (in some jurisdictions) where judges send people to jail to compel them to pay judgments or fees that they cannot afford to …

The New Laboratories Of Democracy, Gerald S. Dickinson

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Epic Fail: Harkenrider V. Hochul And New York's 2022 Misadventure In "Independent" Redistricting, Richard Briffault

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

The Move Toward An Indigenous Virgin Islands Jurisprudence: Banks In Its Second Decade, Kristen David Adams

Fordham Law Review

In 2011, the Supreme Court of the U.S. Virgin Islands decided Banks v. International Rental & Leasing Corp. and, with that decision, introduced a new era in Virgin Islands jurisprudence that embraced a much more active role for Virgin Islands courts and a correspondingly diminished role for the American Law Institute’s restatements. This Essay examines what I will call “second-generation” decisions referencing Banks with the goal of determining whether Banks and its progeny have met, or are at least in the process of meeting, “the goal of establishing ‘an indigenous Virgin Islands jurisprudence’” set by the Banks court. Ultimately, this …

Rucho In The States: Districting Cases And The Nature Of State Judicial Power, Chad M. Oldfather

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Exhuming Nondelegation . . . Intelligibly, Zachary R.S. Zajdel

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

Whether by avalanche or a thousand cuts, the intelligible principle test may be awaiting its untimely demise at the behest of a reinvigorated nondelegation movement. Perhaps looking to speed up the decomposition, the Fifth Circuit in Jarkesy v. Securities and Exchange Commission struck down the SEC’s discretion to pursue enforcement actions with its own Administrative Law Judges or in federal court as unconstitutionally delegated legislative power. This Note posits that Jarkesy was rightly decided but rife with uncompelling reasoning. Establishing this requires a detour into the meaning of the Necessary and Proper Clause, the significance of the separation of powers, …

The Exit Theory Of Judicial Appraisal, William J. Carney, Keith Sharfman

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

For many years, we and other commentators have observed the problem with allowing judges wide discretion to fashion appraisal awards to dissenting shareholders based on widely divergent, expert valuation evidence submitted by the litigating parties. The results of this discretionary approach to valuation have been to make appraisal litigation less predictable and therefore more costly and likely. While this has been beneficial to professionals who profit from corporate valuation litigation, it has been harmful to shareholders, making deals costlier and less likely to be completed.

In this Article, we propose to end the problem of discretionary judicial valuation by tracing …

A Living Legacy: The Katzmann Study Group On Immigrant Representation, The Honorable Denny Chin

Fordham Law Review

On March 9, 2023, hundreds of individuals—including immigration lawyers, advocates, government officials, academics, journalists, and philanthropists—gathered for a symposium at Fordham University School of Law entitled Looking Back and Looking Forward: Fifteen Years of Advancing Immigrant Representation. The symposium was organized by the Fordham Law Review and sponsored by law school centers and clinics, nonprofit organizations, and the Katzmann Study Group on Immigrant Representation (the “Study Group”). For members of the Study Group, the day was particularly poignant because several sessions at the symposium honored the life and accomplishments of the Hon. Robert A. Katzmann, the Study Group’s founder and …

Bottom-Rung Appeals, Merritt E. Mcalister

Fordham Law Review

There are “haves” and “have-nots” in the federal appellate courts, and the “haves” get more attention. For decades, the courts have used a triage regime under which they distribute judicial attention selectively: some appeals receive a lot of judicial attention, and some appeals receive barely any. What this Article reveals is that this triage system produces demonstrably unequal results, depending on the circuit handling the appeal and whether the appellant has counsel or not. Together, these two factors produce significant disparities: in one circuit, for example, an unrepresented appellant receives, on average, a decision less than a tenth the length …

Carceral Deference: Courts And Their Pro-Prison Propensities, Danielle C. Jefferis

Fordham Law Review

Judicial deference to nonjudicial state actors, as a general matter, is ubiquitous, both in the law and as a topic of legal scholarship. But “carceral deference”—judicial deference to prison officials on issues concerning the legality of prison conditions—has received far less attention in legal literature, and the focus has been almost entirely on its jurisprudential legitimacy. This Article contextualizes carceral deference historically, politically, and culturally, and it thus adds a piece that has been missing from the literature. Drawing on primary and secondary historical sources and anchoring the analysis in Bourdieu’s field theory, this Article is an important step to …

Bastions Of Independence Or Shields Of Misconduct?: Increasing Transparency In Judicial Conduct Commissions, Katarina Herring-Trott

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Innovation & Limitation Of Arbitral Courts, Pamela K. Bookman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

What's The Difference Between A Conclusion And A Fact?, Howard M. Erichson

Faculty Scholarship

In Ashcroft v. Iqbal, building on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, the Supreme Court instructed district courts to treat a complaint’s conclusions differently from allegations of fact. Facts, but not conclusions, are assumed true for purposes of a motion to dismiss. The Court did little to help judges or lawyers understand this elusive distinction, and, indeed, obscured the distinction with its language. The Court said it was distinguishing “legal conclusions” from factual allegations. The application in Twombly and Iqbal, however, shows that the relevant distinction is not between law and fact, but rather between different types of factual assertions. This …

Marshall As A Judge, Robert Post

Fordham Law Review

Marshall is a towering and inspirational figure in the history of American constitutional law. He changed American life forever and unquestionably for the better. But the contemporary significance of Marshall’s legacy is also, in ways that challenge present practices and beliefs, ambiguous.

Regulating Prosecutors’ Courtroom Misconduct, Bruce A. Green

Faculty Scholarship

Trial prosecutors’ visible misbehavior, such as improper questioning of witnesses and improper jury arguments, may not seem momentous. Sometimes, the improprieties are simply the product of poor training or overenthusiasm. In many cases, they pass unremarked. As the Chicago Eight trial illustrated, trial prosecutors’ improprieties may also be overshadowed by the excesses of other trial participants—the witnesses, the defendants, the defense lawyers, or even the trial judge. And when noticed, prosecutors’ trial misbehavior can ordinarily be remedied, and then restrained, by a capable trial judge. It is little wonder that disciplinary authorities, having bigger fish to fry, are virtually indifferent …

A Conversation With The Honorable Rosalie Silberman Abella And Dean Matthew Diller, Rosalie Silberman Abella, Matthew Diller

Fordham Law Review

DEAN MATTHEW DILLER: This year we are leading up to our celebration of 100 Years of Women at Fordham Law School. In September 1918, the Fordham Law faculty voted to admit women, and we are planning to celebrate that in style. But tonight perhaps is a bit of a teaser for that. Justice Rosalie Silberman Abella is a woman of firsts. She is the first Jewish woman to sit on the bench of the Supreme Court of Canada, and before the Supreme Court, when she was appointed to the Ontario Family Court in 1976, she became the first Jewish woman …

Study Group On Immigrant Representation: The First Decade, Robert A. Katzmann

Fordham Law Review

All of us here have a common goal: ensuring adequate legal representation of the immigrant poor. A courtroom has multiple players with different roles, but all would agree that adequate legal representation of the parties is essential to the fair and effective administration of justice. Deficient representation frustrates the work of courts and ill serves litigants. All too often, and throughout the country, courts that address immigration matters must contend with such a breakdown in legal representation, a crisis of massive proportions with severe, tragic costs to immigrants and their families. For our nation’s immigrants, the urgent need for competent …

Universal Representation, Lindsay Nash

Fordham Law Review

In an era in which there is little good news for immigrant communities and even holding the line has become an ambitious goal, one progressive project has continued to gain steam: the movement to provide universal representation for noncitizens in removal proceedings. This effort, initially born out of a pilot project in New York City, has generated a host of replication projects throughout the nation and holds the promise of even broader expansion. But as it grows, this effort must confront challenges from within: the sort-of supporters who want to limit this representation system’s coverage in a number of ways, …

Learned Hand On Statutory Interpretation: Theory And Practice, Thomas W. Merrill

Fordham Law Review

It is a great honor to take part in the celebration of the Second Circuit’s 125th anniversary and in particular to present the Hands Lecture. The Second Circuit in the 1930s and 1940s came to be called the “Hand Court,” and during those years it established its reputation as the most admired of the U.S. circuit courts of appeals. It was called the Hand Court because two of its judges, who often formed the majority on three-judge panels, bore the surname Hand. Learned Hand is today regarded as a great common law judge, and significant attention has been given, most …

The Law Of Nations And The Judicial Branch, Thomas H. Lee

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Learning To Live With Judicial Partisanship: A Response To Cassandra Burke Robertson, Bruce A. Green, Rebecca Roiphe

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Seventeenth Annual Albert A. Destefano Lecture On Corporate, Securities & Financial Law At The Fordham Corporate Law Center, Caroline M. Gentile, The Honorable Karen L. Valihura

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

No abstract provided.

Adjudication In The Age Of Disagreement, John Fabian Witt

Fordham Law Review

In the time I have here with you today I would like to offer the beginnings of an answer. It does not lie in the distance between the court’s traditions and Manton’s conduct. That would be too easy. At base, I think the answer lies in something far more subtle and interesting: the relationship between acentral tradition of the Second Circuit and one of the great questions we face as a society today. That question is how to deal with disagreement.

Affirming Firm Sanctions: The Authority To Sanction Law Firms Under 28 U.S.C. § 1927, Vincent J. Margiotta

Fordham Law Review

A circuit split exists as to whether 28 U.S.C. § 1927 allows for an award of sanctions against nonattorneys or nonrepresentatives. Five federal courts of appeals—the Second, Third, Eighth, Eleventh, and the District of Columbia Circuits—hold that, to further the purpose of 28 U.S.C. § 1927, courts have the authority to sanction a law firm for the conduct of its attorneys, in addition to the authority to sanction individual officers of the court. The Sixth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits disagree, concluding that the statute allows federal courts to sanction only individuals—“attorney[s] or other person[s] admitted to conduct cases in any …

It’S Time For An Intervention!: Resolving The Conflict Between Rule 24(A)(2) And Article Iii Standing, Gregory R. Manring

Fordham Law Review

This Note argues that federal courts should employ an approach that is more related to maintaining the benefits of Rule 24 without running afoul of Article III—a task the yes-or-no approach is ill equipped to handle. Ultimately, an approach that is based on employing a standing analysis only where the Case or Controversy Clause is implicated anew allows the greatest access to the intervention device without running the risk of entertaining nonjusticiable disputes.

It’S Time For An Intervention!: Resolving The Conflict Between Rule 24(A)(2) And Article Iii Standing, Gregory R. Manring

Fordham Law Review

This Note argues that federal courts should employ an approach that is more related to maintaining the benefits of Rule 24 without running afoul of Article III—a task the yes-or-no approach is ill equipped to handle. Ultimately, an approach that is based on employing a standing analysis only where the Case or Controversy Clause is implicated anew allows the greatest access to the intervention device without running the risk of entertaining nonjusticiable disputes.

The Robert L. Levine Distinguished Lecture: A Conversation With Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg And Professor Aaron Saiger, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Aaron Saiger

Fordham Law Review

PROFESSOR AARON SAIGER: It’s a signal honor for Fordham Law School and a personal honor for me and a pleasure to have Justice Ginsburg here tonight. We want to thank you for coming. I think I will not reiterate all of the thanks Dean Diller has offered, except to say that we are very grateful to the Levine family and deeply indebted to the students of the Law Review who have made tonight happen. The format of the evening is as follows: I will ask questions and the Justice will answer them.

Justice And Other Crimes Evidence: The Smorgasbord Ploy, Kenneth Graham

Fordham Law Review

The smorgasbord ploy probably plays only a minor role in the admission of other crimes evidence. But it offers us a nice window into the uses and abuses of Rule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence (“the Rules”) and its state clones. Rule 404(b)’s drafters may have supposed that trial judges would look among the illustrative uses in Rule 404(b) and select the one or two that seem most apropos to the case before them. However, the practitioners of smorgasbordism do not make any choices but instead list all (or most) of the illustrative uses to support the admission …

The Sixteenth Annual Albert A. Destefano Lecture On Corporate, Securities & Financial Law At The Fordham Corporate Law Center, Sean J. Griffith, The Honorable Andre G. Bouchard

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

No abstract provided.

The Court Of Appeals As The Middle Child, Raymond Lohier

Fordham Law Review

It’s said that middle children are most likely to be forgotten in the chaos of family life. The same could be said of the U.S. Courts of Appeals, which in 2016, mark their 125th anniversary, and which are the middle child of the federal judicial family. As too few people, even academics, know, the courts of appeals were created in 1891 by the Evarts Act, more than a century after the Constitution and the First Judiciary Act. The history of the courts of appeals has accordingly hovered somewhat uneasily next to that of the U.S. Supreme Court and the district …