Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Legal History Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 19 of 19

Full-Text Articles in Legal History

How Much Do Expert Opinions Matter? An Empirical Investigation Of Selection Bias, Adversarial Bias, And Judicial Deference In Chinese Medical, Chunyan Ding Dec 2019

How Much Do Expert Opinions Matter? An Empirical Investigation Of Selection Bias, Adversarial Bias, And Judicial Deference In Chinese Medical, Chunyan Ding

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

This article investigates the nature of the operation and the role of expert opinions in Chinese medical negligence litigation, drawing on content analysis of 3,619 medical negligence cases and an in-depth survey of judges with experience of adjudicating medical negligence cases. It offers three major findings: first, that both parties to medical negligence disputes show significant selection bias of medical opinions, as do courts when selecting court-appointed experts; second, expert opinions in medical negligence litigation demonstrate substantial adversarial bias; third, courts display very strong judicial deference to expert opinions in determining medical negligence liability. This article fills the methodological gap …


American Legion V. American Humanist Association, Seth T. Bonilla Oct 2019

American Legion V. American Humanist Association, Seth T. Bonilla

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The separation of church and state is a key element of American democracy, but its interpretation has been challenged as the country grows more diverse. In American Legion v. American Humanist Association, the Supreme Court adopted a new standard to analyze whether a religious symbol on public land maintained by public funding violated the Constitution’s Establishment Clause.


Death Be Not Strange. The Montreal Convention’S Mislabeling Of Human Remains As Cargo And Its Near Unbreakable Liability Limits, Christopher Ogolla Oct 2019

Death Be Not Strange. The Montreal Convention’S Mislabeling Of Human Remains As Cargo And Its Near Unbreakable Liability Limits, Christopher Ogolla

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

This article discusses Article 22 of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (“The Montreal Convention”) and its impact on the transportation of human remains. The Convention limits carrier liability to a sum of 19 Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) per kilogram in the case of destruction, loss, damage or delay of part of the cargo or of any object contained therein. Transportation of human remains falls under Article 22 which forecloses any recovery for pain and suffering unaccompanied by physical injury. This Article finds fault with this liability limit. The Article notes that if …


The Future Of Dairy Cooperatives In The Modern Marketplace: Redeveloping The Capper-Volstead Act, Sarah K. Phillips Oct 2019

The Future Of Dairy Cooperatives In The Modern Marketplace: Redeveloping The Capper-Volstead Act, Sarah K. Phillips

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Agriculture plays a fundamental role in the U.S. economy as a multibillion-dollar industry that feeds people all over the world. However, over the past decade, the dairy industry in particular has changed from a reliable sector of the greater agricultural industry into an unsettled, politically-charged, and fractured group. Dairy farmers’ consistently receiving low milk prices has facilitated this divide. Tired of being ignored and underpaid, dairy farmers are demanding change in the current dairy market structure.

Federal Milk Marketing Orders and a variety of statutes regulate the dairy industry, but the 1922 Capper-Volstead Act remains the most notable piece of …


Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review Sep 2019

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

No abstract provided.


Due Process Supreme Court Rockland County Jul 2019

Due Process Supreme Court Rockland County

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division Third Department Jul 2019

Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division Third Department

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division Jul 2019

Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Due Process Pringle V. Wolfe (Decided 28, 1996) Jul 2019

Due Process Pringle V. Wolfe (Decided 28, 1996)

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Due Process People V. Scott (Decided June 5, 1996) Jul 2019

Due Process People V. Scott (Decided June 5, 1996)

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Due Process Court Of Appeals Jul 2019

Due Process Court Of Appeals

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Supreme Court Queens County Jul 2019

Supreme Court Queens County

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Double Jeopardy Jul 2019

Double Jeopardy

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Double Jeopardy Supreme Court Appellate Division Second Department Jul 2019

Double Jeopardy Supreme Court Appellate Division Second Department

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Double Jeopardy Jul 2019

Double Jeopardy

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


The United Nations Compensation Commission: Mass Reparations Apotheosis, Gregory Townsend Jul 2019

The United Nations Compensation Commission: Mass Reparations Apotheosis, Gregory Townsend

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.


O’Neill, Oh O’Neill, Wherefore Art Thou O’Neill: Defining And Cementing The Requirements For Asserting Deliberative Process Privilege, Andrew Scott Apr 2019

O’Neill, Oh O’Neill, Wherefore Art Thou O’Neill: Defining And Cementing The Requirements For Asserting Deliberative Process Privilege, Andrew Scott

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The government may invoke the deliberative process privilege to protect the communications of government officials involving policy-driven decision-making. The privilege protects communications made before policy makers act upon the policy decision to allow government officials to speak candidly when deciding a course of action without fear of their words being used against them.

This privilege is not absolute and courts recognize the legitimate countervailing interest the public has in transparency. The Supreme Court in United States v. Reynolds held that someone with control over the protected information should personally consider the privilege before asserting it but did not provide definitive …


Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review Feb 2019

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

No abstract provided.


Judges Do It Better: Why Judges Can (And Should) Decide Life Or Death, Andrew R. Ford Jan 2019

Judges Do It Better: Why Judges Can (And Should) Decide Life Or Death, Andrew R. Ford

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Following its decision in Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court of the United States has attempted to standardize procedures that states use to subject offenders to the ultimate penalty. In practice, this attempt at standardization has divided capital sentencing into two distinct parts: the death eligibility decision and the death selection decision. The eligibility decision addresses whether the sentencer may impose the death penalty, while the selection decision determines who among that limited subset of eligible offenders is sentenced to death. In Ring v. Arizona, the Court held for the first time that the Sixth Amendment right to …