Jurisprudence Commons^™

Perbandingan Pengaturan Dan Konsep Bentuk Hukum Partnership Di Negara Brunei Darussalam Dengan Indonesia Dikaitkan Dengan Hukum Perdata, Dewi Mega Victoria

"Dharmasisya” Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI

This study aims to find out and analyze the comparative legal form of the Partnership in Indonesia as stipulated in the Indonesian Civil Code Book with the State of Brunei Darussalam as stipulated in the Laws of Brunei, Chapter 106 Contracts. There are 5 points that can be examined from the rules in 2 countries relating to the Partnership, namely: Status of Legal Entity, Establishment of Partnership, Organ Partnership, Responsibility and Disbanding the Partnership. This is a reference to renew the Partnership regulations in Indonesia in the future with reference to the state regulation of Brunei Darussalam. This research is …

Ordinary Causation: A Study In Experimental Statutory Interpretation, James Macleod

Indiana Law Journal

In a series of recent split decisions interpreting criminal and tort-like legislation, the Supreme Court has purported to give statutory causation requirements their ordinary, plain meaning. Armed with dictionaries, examples from everyday speech, and commonsense intuitions, the Court’s majority has explained that statutory phrases like “because of” and “results from” entail but-for causation as a matter of ordinary usage. There’s just one problem: The Court’s majority (and the many state and federal courts following its lead) is wrong on the facts—specifically, the facts about how people ordinarily interpret, understand, and use causal language.

This Article considers a novel approach to …

Keeping Up With Your Sister Court: Unpublished Memorandums, No-Citation Rules, And The Superior Court Of Pennsylvania, Logan Hetherington

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

As Pennsylvania’s intermediate appellate court of general jurisdiction, the Pennsylvania Superior Court decides thousands of cases each year. The vast majority of those cases are disposed of via unpublished memorandums. These unpublished memorandums are designated as non-precedential and may not be cited by parties before the Superior Court. As a result, litigants and their counsel may not even persuasively cite an unpublished memorandum in briefs or other papers submitted to the Court. Thus, if counsel finds an unpublished memorandum deciding the identical issue of the case at hand and counsel is before the Superior Court judge who authored that opinion, …

Gandhi’S Prophecy: Corporate Violence And A Mindful Law For Bhopal, Nehal A. Patel

Nehal A. Patel

AbstractOver thirty years have passed since the Bhopal chemical disaster began,and in that time scholars of corporate social responsibility (CSR) havediscussed and debated several frameworks for improving corporate responseto social and environmental problems. However, CSR discourse rarelydelves into the fundamental architecture of legal thought that oftenbuttresses corporate dominance in the global economy. Moreover, CSRdiscourse does little to challenge the ontological and epistemologicalassumptions that form the foundation for modern economics and the role ofcorporations in the world.I explore methods of transforming CSR by employing the thought ofMohandas Gandhi. I pay particular attention to Gandhi’s critique ofindustrialization and principle of swadeshi (self-sufficiency) …

Dividing Crime, Multiplying Punishments, John F. Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

When the government wants to impose exceptionally harsh punishment on a criminal defendant, one of the ways it accomplishes this goal is to divide the defendant’s single course of conduct into multiple offenses that give rise to multiple punishments. The Supreme Court has rendered the Double Jeopardy Clause, the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, and the rule of lenity incapable of handling this problem by emptying them of substantive content and transforming them into mere instruments for effectuation of legislative will. This Article demonstrates that all three doctrines originally reflected a substantive legal preference for life and liberty, and a …

Dividing Crime, Multiplying Punishments, John F. Stinneford

UF Law Faculty Publications

When the government wants to impose exceptionally harsh punishment on a criminal defendant, one of the ways it accomplishes this goal is to divide the defendant’s single course of conduct into multiple offenses that give rise to multiple punishments. The Supreme Court has rendered the Double Jeopardy Clause, the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, and the rule of lenity incapable of handling this problem by emptying them of substantive content and transforming them into mere instruments for effectuation of legislative will.

This Article demonstrates that all three doctrines originally reflected a substantive legal preference for life and liberty, and a …

Decorating The Structure: The Art Of Making Human Law, Brian M. Mccall

Brian M McCall

Separation Of Powers Doctrine On The Modern Supreme Court And Four Doctrinal Approaches To Judicial Decision-Making, R. Randall Kelso

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Last Common Law Justice: The Personal Jurisdiction Jurisprudence Of Justice John Paul Stevens, Rodger D. Citron

Rodger Citron

No abstract provided.

The Last Common Law Justice: The Personal Jurisdiction Jurisprudence Of Justice John Paul Stevens, Rodger D. Citron

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Echoes Of The Impact Of Webb V. Mcgowin On The Doctrine Of Consideration Under Contract Law: Some Reflections On The Decision On The Approach Of Its 75th Anniversary, Stephen J. Leacock

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

From Judging Culture To Taxing 'Indians': Tracing The Legal Discourse Of The 'Indian Mode Of Life', Constance Macintosh

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

In this article I consider how judicial decision making characterizes Indigenous peoples’ culture outside the context of determinations under section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. I am concerned with how contemporary jurisprudence sometimes subjects Indigenous people to stereotyped tests of Aboriginality when they seek to exercise legislated rights. These common law tests of Aboriginality tend to turn on troubling oppositional logics, such as whether or not the Indigenous person engages in waged labour or commercial activities. These tests arose in historic legislation and policy that were premised on social evolutionary theory and were directed at determining whether an Indigenous …

Of Equal Wrongs And Half Rights, Gideon Parchomovsky, Peter Siegelman, Steven Thel

All Faculty Scholarship

With a tiny handful of exceptions, common law jurisprudence is predicated on a “winner-take-all” principle: the plaintiff either gets the entire entitlement at issue or collects nothing at all. Cases that split an entitlement between the two parties are exceedingly rare. While there may be sound reasons for this all-or-nothing rule, we argue in this Article that the law should prefer equal division of an entitlement in a limited but important set of property, tort and contracts cases. The common element in such cases is a windfall, a gain or loss that occurs despite the fact that no ex ante …

Setting The Limits In Texas Construction Law: A Look At The Surety's Limitations Under Indemnity Agreements And Equitable Subrogation Comment., John C. Warren

St. Mary's Law Journal

To clarify divergent case law, Texas courts should adopt good faith as the necessary standard governing indemnity agreements. Texas court decisions limiting settlement of bond claims by sureties can be split into three categories: (1) those cases where indemnity agreements fail to vest authority in the indemnitee to settle claims or require a good faith standard; (2) those expressly stating indemnitees have authority to settle claims in good faith; and (2) those expressly vesting a surety with exclusive rights to determine which bonded claims should be settled. Under the first line of cases courts apply common law indemnity principles requiring …

Overview Of The Role Of Precedent In The Legal System Of The United States, Ana Elena Fierro

LLM Theses and Essays

Traditionally, legal systems have been classified as either Common Law or Civil Law; scholars distinguish these systems based on their origins, as well their attitudes towards stare decisis. Common law considers precedent as a source of binding rules, while civil law does not. However, some scholars consider the methods for legal reasoning to be almost the same in every legal system. These scholars maintain that regardless of the source of law in a particular country, once a judge determines that the facts of one case are similar to those regulated by a certain rule, the judge will apply that particular …

Sanctuary: The Legal Institution In England, Steven Pope

Seattle University Law Review

This Article discusses the institution of sanctuary that was recognized under the Common Law of England from at least the early Middle Ages until the Jacobean period, that is, from about the seventh to the seventeenth centuries A.D. This Article does not include a specific discussion of the modern American idea of sanctuary as the term is applied to the act of aiding an alien to remain illegally in the United States to escape political persecution in the alien’s own country. However, a consideration of the historical institution of sanctuary may shed light on the contemporary issue in two ways. …

Rethinking The Rules Against Corporate Privacy Rights: Some Conceptual Quandries For The Common Law, Anita L. Allen

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

An Historical And Critical Analysis Of Interpleader, Geoffrey C. Hazard Jr., Myron Moskovitz

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Legal Philosophy - Recent Contributions, Neil W. Schilke

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Balance Sheet Of Law And Religion, Frank E. Horack Jr.

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

A Government Of Laws Or A Government By Men, O R. Mcguire

Indiana Law Journal

Address delivered February 5, 1938, in Indianapolis before the Indiana State Bar Association, by 0. R. McGuire, of Washington, D. C., counsel of the comptroller general of the United States, and Chairman of the Special Committee on Administrative Law of the American Bar Association.

NOTE: Cover is mislabeled v.13 no.4 April 1938

Essays In Jurisprudence And The Common Law, Jeff B. Fordham

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.