Jurisprudence Commons^™

Testing Minimalism: A Reply, Cass R. Sunstein

Michigan Law Review

Some judges are less ambitious than others; they have minimalist tendencies. Minimalists are unambitious along two dimensions. First, they seek to rule narrowly rather than broadly. In a single case, they do not wish to resolve other, related problems that might have relevant differences. They are willing to live with the costs and burdens of uncertainty, which they tend to prefer to the risks of premature resolution of difficult issues. Second, minimalists seek to rule shallowly rather than deeply, in the sense that they favor arguments that do not take a stand on the foundational debates in law and politics. …

Against Interpretive Supremacy, Saikrishna Prakash, John Yoo

Michigan Law Review

Many constitutional scholars are obsessed with judicial review and the many questions surrounding it. One perennial favorite is whether the Constitution even authorizes judicial review. Another is whether the other branches of the federal government must obey the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution and what, if anything, the other branches must do to execute the judiciary's judgments. Marbury v. Madison has been a full-employment program for many constitutional law scholars, including ourselves. Larry Kramer, the new Dean of Stanford Law School, shares this passion. He has devoted roughly the last decade of his career, with two lengthy law review …

Rule-Oriented Realism, Emily Sherwin

Michigan Law Review

In his new book The Law and Ethics of Restitution, Hanoch Dagan undertakes to explain and justify the American law of restitution. He offers a broad theoretical account of this poorly understood subject, designed not only to fortify the substantive law of restitution but also to clarify the role and methodology of courts in developing the field. Dagan's book also provides lively discussion of the role of restitution in some of the most highly publicized legal developments of recent years. Those who think of restitution as an obscure branch of "legal remedies" may be surprised to read about the …

Judge Arnold's Four Rules: A Model For A Life In The Law, Sean Unger

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Jurisprudence Of Justice Esther Tomljanovich: Balancing The Scales Of Justice, Ann L. Iijima

William Mitchell Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Court Special Masters: A Vital Resource In The Era Of Complex Litigation, Mark A. Fellows, Roger S. Haydock

William Mitchell Law Review

This article is dedicated to all those who have served as special masters in federal court. After serving as a judicial master, it is easy to believe in the importance of the role in our grand system of justice. After reading this article, we hope it will be clear how vital masters are to everyone receiving fair, just, and expedient civil justice.

Special Masters In State Court Complex Litigation: An Available And Underused Case Management Tool, Lynn Jokela, David F. Herr

William Mitchell Law Review

This article examines the role masters have played in litigation and explores the benefits that might be obtained from the greater use of masters in the future. The FJC survey of federal judges appointing special masters concluded that special masters were “extremely or very effective.” The FJC study is an empirical survey of the effectiveness of special masters, and it includes commentary from judges regarding their experience after appointing special masters. These benefits include better, faster, and fairer resolution of litigation in the cases in which masters are used, as well as an easing of the burdens these cases place …

2004 Special Masters Conference: Transcript Of Proceedings, Various Special Masters

William Mitchell Law Review

A historic gathering of special masters occurred on October 15th and 16th, 2004 in Saint Paul, Minnesota. Federal and state court-appointed masters from around the country met for the first time to share their experiences as special masters and to form a national association of court appointed masters. This issue of the William Mitchell Law Review contains articles presented at the conference and the transcript of faculty presentations. Throughout the transcript of faculty presentations, the word “speaker” denotes a conference attendee.

Canons Of Construction And The Elusive Quest For Neutral Reasoning, James J. Brudney, Corey Ditslear

Vanderbilt Law Review

Federal statutes, like the lawmaking enterprise itself, are seldom models of efficiency. Whether through inevitable laxity or conscious choice, Congress when legislating leaves a fair number of gaps in the meaning of its complex regulatory schemes. In filling those gaps with case-specific interpretive responses, federal courts perform an important policymaking function.

Such policymaking has lately generated increased concerns about the politicization of the judiciary. Scholars using social science techniques have contributed to the image of courts as policymakers, by establishing that judges' political party affiliation and ideological orientation are at times significant predictors of voting behavior. Presidents and senators have …

American Courts Are Drowning In The "Gene Pool": Excavating The Slippery Slope Mechanisms Behind Judicial Endorsement Of Dna Databases, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 115 (2005), Meghan Riley

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Balancing A Burning Cross: The Court And Virginia V. Black, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1205 (2005), Jason A. Abel

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Kruse V. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. (Decided September 10, 2004), Jennifer Katehos

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.