Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- St. Mary’s Law Journal (7)
- St. Mary’s University School of Law (7)
- Compliance (2)
- Employees (2)
- Tort law (2)
-
- 0.10 percent or above in blood alcohol concentration. (1)
- Accidental (1)
- Administrative remedies (1)
- Adopt. (1)
- Alternatives (1)
- Amoco Prod. Co. v. Alexander (1)
- Any known right or safeguard (1)
- Aranda v. Insurance Co. of North America (1)
- Arnold v. National County Mutual (1)
- Article (1)
- Article I (1)
- Bad faith (1)
- Boyle v. United Technologies Corp. (1)
- Brewster v. Lanyon Zinc Co. (1)
- Broaden judicial definition (1)
- Bynum v. FMC Corp. (1)
- Catherine A. Hale (1)
- Cause of action (1)
- Caveat emptor (1)
- Clifford C. Herberg (1)
- Clifton v. Koontz (1)
- Common-law (1)
- Communication of hazard material. (1)
- Compensation (1)
- Confusion (1)
Articles 31 - 41 of 41
Full-Text Articles in Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility
Judicial Rulemakers Held To Have Produced Federal Sentencing Guidelines Within Permissible Twilight Area In Which Branches Of Government Merge., Janis Hillman
St. Mary's Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Causes Of Action Stemming From Federal Government's Negligence In Implementing Mandatory Regulations Or Statutes Are Not Barred By Discretionary Function Exception Of Federal Tort Claims Act., Irl I. Nathan
St. Mary's Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Foreword., Barbara Bader Aldave
Address., William H. Rehnquist
The Federal Courts Study Committee Begins Its Work., Joseph F. Weis Jr.
The Federal Courts Study Committee Begins Its Work., Joseph F. Weis Jr.
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract Forthcoming.
Civil Rico: Overview On The Eve Of The 200th Anniversary Of The Federal Judiciary., Dan A. Naranjo, Edward L. Pina
Civil Rico: Overview On The Eve Of The 200th Anniversary Of The Federal Judiciary., Dan A. Naranjo, Edward L. Pina
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract Forthcoming.
Improper Use Of Removal And Its Disruptive Effect On State Court Proceedings: A Call To Reform 28 U.S.C. 1446., Ellen Bloomer Mitchell
Improper Use Of Removal And Its Disruptive Effect On State Court Proceedings: A Call To Reform 28 U.S.C. 1446., Ellen Bloomer Mitchell
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract Forthcoming.
Technology Transfers: What If The Other Party Files Bankruptcy., Ann Livingston, Leif M. Clark
Technology Transfers: What If The Other Party Files Bankruptcy., Ann Livingston, Leif M. Clark
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract Forthcoming.
The New Texas Business Corporation Act Merger Provisions., Curtis W. Huff
The New Texas Business Corporation Act Merger Provisions., Curtis W. Huff
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract Forthcoming.
Interference With Prospective Civil Litigation By Spollation Of Evidence: Should Texas Adopt A New Tort., Philip A. Lionberger
Interference With Prospective Civil Litigation By Spollation Of Evidence: Should Texas Adopt A New Tort., Philip A. Lionberger
St. Mary's Law Journal
Texas courts should adopt a tort for spoliation of evidence. Spoliation of evidence is the tampering with, interference with, loss of, or destruction of evidence. Spoliation of evidence is a serious legal problem because it increases a litigant’s difficulty in proving a cause of action or a defense. Evidence destruction may also increase litigation costs and cause the trial court to make factfinding errors. Texas courts should adopt the tort of spoliation of evidence because it compensates injured litigants and deters future acts of spoliation. Another reason for adopting the tort for spoliation of evidence is the inadequacy of alternative …
D.W.I. Suspects Do Not Have Right To Consult With Counsel Before Intoxilyzer Test Under Texas Constitution Because Test Is Not A Critical Stage In Proceedings., Clifford C. Herberg Jr.
D.W.I. Suspects Do Not Have Right To Consult With Counsel Before Intoxilyzer Test Under Texas Constitution Because Test Is Not A Critical Stage In Proceedings., Clifford C. Herberg Jr.
St. Mary's Law Journal
Under the Texas Constitution, D.W.I. suspects do not have a right to consult with counsel before an intoxilyzer test because the test is not considered a “critical stage” in proceedings. In Forte v. State, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals adopted the critical stage approach and held D.W.I. suspects do not have a right to counsel under the Texas Constitution until the filing of the complaint. The court reasoned because the statute implies consent to the test, and the suspect has no legal right to refuse the test, counsel’s presence would not serve to protect “any known right or safeguard,” …