Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Courts (4)
- Law and Politics (3)
- Legal History (3)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (2)
- Constitutional Law (2)
-
- Health Law and Policy (2)
- Law and Society (2)
- Legal Profession (2)
- Legal Writing and Research (2)
- Litigation (2)
- Social Welfare Law (2)
- Arts and Humanities (1)
- Civil Law (1)
- Conflict of Laws (1)
- Environmental Law (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Family Law (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Law and Gender (1)
- Law and Psychology (1)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (1)
- Natural Resources Law (1)
- Property Law and Real Estate (1)
- Religion (1)
- Sexuality and the Law (1)
- Tax Law (1)
- Water Law (1)
- Publication
- File Type
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Tell Us A Story, But Don't Make It A Good One: Resolving The Confusion Regarding Emotional Stories And Federal Rule Of Evidence 403, Cathren Page
Cathren Page
Abstract: Tell Us a Story, But Don’t Make It A Good One: Resolving the Confusion Regarding Emotional Stories and Federal Rule of Evidence 403 by Cathren Koehlert-Page Courts need to reword their opinions regarding Rule 403 to address the tension between the advice to tell an emotionally evocative story at trial and the notion that evidence can be excluded if it is too emotional. In the murder mystery Mystic River, Dave Boyle is kidnapped in the beginning. The audience feels empathy for Dave who as an adult becomes one of the main suspects in the murder of his friend Jimmy’s …
Assuring "Detached But Passionate Investigation And Decision": The Role Of Guardians Ad Litem In Saikewicz-Type Cases, Charles Baron
Assuring "Detached But Passionate Investigation And Decision": The Role Of Guardians Ad Litem In Saikewicz-Type Cases, Charles Baron
Charles H. Baron
The author focuses this Article upon the aspect of the Saikewicz decision which determines that the kind of "proxy consent" question involved in that case required for its decision "the process of detached but passionate investigation and decision that forms the ideal on which the judicial branch of government was created." This aspect of the decision has drawn much criticism from the medical community on the ground that it embroils what doctors believe to be a medical question in the adversarial processes of the court system. The author criticizes the decision from an entirely opposite perspective, arguing that the court's …
Antimonopoly And The Radical Lochean Origins Of Western Water Law, Michael Blumm
Antimonopoly And The Radical Lochean Origins Of Western Water Law, Michael Blumm
Michael Blumm
This review of David Schorr's book, The Colorado Doctrine: Water Rights, Corporations, and Distributive Justice on the American Frontier, maintains that the book is a therapeutic corrective to the standard history of the origins of western water law as celebration of economic efficiency and wealth maximization. Schorr's account convincingly contends that the roots of prior appropriation water law--the "Colorado Doctrine"--lie in distributional justice concerns, not in the supposed efficiency advantages of private property over common property. The goals of the founders of the Colorado doctrine, according to Schorr, were to advance Radical Lochean principles such as widespread distibution of water …
The United States Constitution And Its History Through The Barristers And Political, Allen E. Shoenberger
The United States Constitution And Its History Through The Barristers And Political, Allen E. Shoenberger
Allen E Shoenberger
No abstract provided.
Chief Justice Roberts' Individual Mandate: The Lawless Medicine Of Nfib V. Sebelius, Gregory Magarian
Chief Justice Roberts' Individual Mandate: The Lawless Medicine Of Nfib V. Sebelius, Gregory Magarian
Gregory P. Magarian
After the U.S. Supreme Court in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius held nearly all of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act constitutional, praise rained down on Chief Justice John Roberts. The Chief Justice’s lead opinion broke with his usual conservative allies on the Court by upholding the Act’s individual mandate under the Taxing Clause. Numerous academic and popular commentators have lauded the Chief Justice for his political courage and institutional pragmatism. In this essay, Professor Magarian challenges the heroic narrative surrounding the Chief Justice’s opinion. The essay contends that the opinion is, in two distinct senses, fundamentally …