Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Appellate court (3)
- Judges (2)
- Judicial discretion (2)
- Judicial review (2)
- Legal profession (2)
-
- Supreme court (2)
- Unpublished opinions (2)
- Abuse of discretion (1)
- Alternatives (1)
- Amendment 80 (1)
- American law (1)
- Appeals (1)
- Appellate discretion (1)
- Appellate procedure (1)
- Appellate process (1)
- Appellate review (1)
- Arkansas Constitution (1)
- Arkansas Supreme Court (1)
- Arkansas Supreme Court; Arkansas General Assembly; judicial influence on legislative policy-making; compensation to court-appointed counsel; State v. Ruiz & Van Denton; Pickens v. State; Coulter v. State; Arnold v. Kemp; judicial-legislative policy making in Arkansas; Arkansas pattern of court-legislative communication; (1)
- Case briefs (1)
- Civil juries (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Class actions (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Court opinion (1)
- Court rules (1)
- Courts (1)
- Death penalty (1)
- Defenses (1)
- Publication Year
Articles 1 - 16 of 16
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
Pothole Laws, Appellate Courts, And Judicial Drift, Kenneth L. Gartner
Pothole Laws, Appellate Courts, And Judicial Drift, Kenneth L. Gartner
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
This article begins by describing the structure of the appellate system in New York state, introducing the features of the typical New York pothole law, and summarizing the New York cases that set the substantive and procedural background for a discussion and analysis of judicial drift.
Narratives Of Self-Government In Making The Case, Benjamin L. Berger
Narratives Of Self-Government In Making The Case, Benjamin L. Berger
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
No abstract provided.
Infrequently Asked Questions, Edward T. Swaine
Infrequently Asked Questions, Edward T. Swaine
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
If appellate advocates could hear from courts about topics that might be raised during oral argument—as opposed to relying solely on their ability to anticipate the issues—might their answers be better? That seems likely, but it is unlikely that research could confirm that, as judicial practice overwhelmingly favors impromptu questioning. Spontaneity may be harmless if the question was predictable, or unavoidable if a judge just thought of the question. But sometimes advocates have to answer challenging questions concerning the law, facts, or implications of a position—questions that help decide the case, either due to the quality of the answer or …
Sua Sponte Actions In The Appellate Courts: The "Gorilla Rule" Revisited, Ronald J. Offenkrantz, Aaron S. Lichter
Sua Sponte Actions In The Appellate Courts: The "Gorilla Rule" Revisited, Ronald J. Offenkrantz, Aaron S. Lichter
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
No abstract provided.
A Judicial Retrospective: Significant Decisions By The Arkansas Supreme Court From 1991 Through 2011, Robert L. Brown
A Judicial Retrospective: Significant Decisions By The Arkansas Supreme Court From 1991 Through 2011, Robert L. Brown
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
In 2008, a study issued by the University of Chicago ranked the Arkansas Supreme Court as the second best state supreme court in the nation, based on the justices' productivity in issuing opinions, quality of opinions, and independence from partisan pressures. The last two decades have seen the Arkansas Supreme Court issue a multitude of opinions considering separation of powers, public education, prior restraint of the press, expanded rights under the Arkansas Constitution, class actions and tort reform.
This article highlights many of the most significant opinions from the last two decades and comments on their impact in Arkansas and …
Precedent In The Federal Courts Of Appeals: An Endangered Or Invasive Species?, John B. Oakley
Precedent In The Federal Courts Of Appeals: An Endangered Or Invasive Species?, John B. Oakley
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
No abstract provided.
No-Citation Rules Under Siege: A Battlefield Report And Analysis, Stephen R. Barnett
No-Citation Rules Under Siege: A Battlefield Report And Analysis, Stephen R. Barnett
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
No abstract provided.
Taking Its Toll: Partisan Judging And Judicial Review, Jeff Broadwater
Taking Its Toll: Partisan Judging And Judicial Review, Jeff Broadwater
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
No abstract provided.
Why Judges Don't Like Petitions For Rehearing, Richard S. Arnold
Why Judges Don't Like Petitions For Rehearing, Richard S. Arnold
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
Petitions for en banc rehearings are rarely granted. A Senior Judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit provides a history and reasoning of the rehearing process and his personal observations on those petitions and processes in today's court.
Constitutional Revolutions: A New Look At Lower Appellate Review In American Constitutionalism, Robert Justin Lipkin
Constitutional Revolutions: A New Look At Lower Appellate Review In American Constitutionalism, Robert Justin Lipkin
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
Judicial review allows the Supreme Court of the United States to perform revolutionary constitutional change. The United States Courts of Appeals could also be a vehicle for revolutionary constitutional adjudication.
The Power Of A Federal Appellate Court To Direct Entry Of Judgment As A Matter Of Law: Reflections On Weisgram V. Marley Co., Robert A. Ragazzo
The Power Of A Federal Appellate Court To Direct Entry Of Judgment As A Matter Of Law: Reflections On Weisgram V. Marley Co., Robert A. Ragazzo
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
Federal district court judges have several mechanisms for controlling civil jury functions. One mechanism is the entry of judgment as a matter of law. Federal appellate courts are able to reverse and direct entry of judgment as a matter of law. This article examines the appropriateness of such authority.
First Amendment—Campaign Finance Reform—The Supreme Court Halts The Eighth Circuit's Invalidation Of State Campaign Contribution Limits. Nixon V. Shrink Missouri Government Political Action Committee, 120 S. Ct. 897 (2000)., Erin Buford Vinett
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Standards Of Review: Judicial Review Of Discretionary Decisionmaking, Martha S. Davis
Standards Of Review: Judicial Review Of Discretionary Decisionmaking, Martha S. Davis
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
The applicable standard of review determines how much deference an appellate court gives a lower court’s decision. Discretionary decisions are review under the “abuse of discretion” standard where the process the lower court used to reach its decision is scrutinized. Three scholars attempts to define this standard are first analyzed followed by cases that have molded the standard. Advice to practitioners concludes the article.
Discretionary Appellate Review Of Non-Final Orders: It’S Time To Change The Rules, Howard B. Eisenberg, Alan B. Morrison
Discretionary Appellate Review Of Non-Final Orders: It’S Time To Change The Rules, Howard B. Eisenberg, Alan B. Morrison
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
This article discusses the uncertainty of United States Courts of Appeals jurisdiction over non-final orders.
Unpublished Opinions: A Comment, Richard S. Arnold
Unpublished Opinions: A Comment, Richard S. Arnold
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
The Honorable Richard S. Arnold gives a federal appellate judge’s perspective of the unpublished opinions debate.
The Influence Of The Arkansas Supreme Court's Opinions On Policy Made By The General Assembly: A Case Study, Chuck Smith
The Influence Of The Arkansas Supreme Court's Opinions On Policy Made By The General Assembly: A Case Study, Chuck Smith
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.