Civil Law Commons^™

Estate Of Adams V. Fallini, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 81 (December 29, 2016), Krystina Viernes

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered whether a party may appeal a district court’s order granting an NRCP 60(b) motion to set aside a final judgment for fraud upon the court. The Court held the district court’s order interlocutory and may not be appealed until a final judgment is entered.The Court held that the district court was not barred from considering the NRCP 60(b) motion and the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting relief based on fraud upon the court.

Victimhood & Agency: How Taking Charge Takes Its Toll, Pam A. Mueller

Pepperdine Law Review

This Article addresses an unexplored tension in the civil justice system regarding victims. The goal of the civil system is to make victims whole. We can, as is most common, attempt to do this financially, or we can consider psychological research that suggests there may be other ways of restoring victims’ statuses. One of the most common nonfinancial solutions is to increase victim participation in the justice process. This is a solution that appeals to many victims and may benefit them psychologically. However, by increasing their participation, they may unknowingly trade off some of the benefits of victimhood. For instance ...

Today's Porn: Not A Constitutional Right; Not A Human Right, Patrick Trueman

Dignity: A Journal on Sexual Exploitation and Violence

No abstract provided.

Why We Must Oppose The Full Decriminalization Of Prostitution, Taina Bien-Aime

Dignity: A Journal on Sexual Exploitation and Violence

No abstract provided.

Las Playas En El Perú ¿Bienes Privados De Facto?, Enrique Varsi Dr.

Enrique Varsi Rospigliosi

The Pro Bono Collaborative Project Spotlight, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Pro Bono Collaborative Staff Publications

No abstract provided.

Rawson V. Ninth Judicial Dist. Court, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 44 (June 29, 2017), Hunter Davidson

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court interpreted the NRS 17.030–17.080 judgment debtor statutes and found: (1) that a joint debtor action gives rise to a final, appealable judgment that precludes review through a petition for extraordinary writ relief; and (2) that the principles governing extraordinary writ relief prevent a petitioner from challenging a void order when the petitioner had the opportunity to appeal the challenged order.

Regime Shift Of Ip Lawmaking And Enforcement From Wto To The International Investment Regime, James Gathii, Cynthia Ho

Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology

No abstract provided.

Bd. Of Review V. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 35 (June 22, 2017), Skyler Sullivan

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Naming all relevant parties as defendants, pursuant to NRS 612.530(1), is a mandatory jurisdictional requirement. Failure to follow this statutory requirement deprives the district court of its jurisdiction to hear a petition for judicial review.

Volume 4 Issue 2 (Complete Spring 2017), David J.. Cook, Zachary Bolitho, Evan Wright, George Steven Swan, Cynthia Brown

Lincoln Memorial University Law Review

A complete version of LMU Law Review Volume Issue 2 for Spring 2017.

Policy Preference: An Unreasonable Means To Advance Moot Claims Under The Endangered Species Act, Molly Mcgrath

Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review

Citizen plaintiffs play a vital role in the enforcement of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”). In Strahan v. Roughead, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts opened the possibility for expansion of a citizen’s ability to impose its own policy preference upon federal agencies working to comply with their statutory requirements under the ESA. Although the District Court properly denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss on the basis of mootness, it erred in its rationale. A plaintiff’s claim under the ESA may survive a mootness challenge, even after the violating agency has reinitiated consultation ...

Punitive Damages Revisited: A Statistical Analysis Of How Federal Circuit Courts Decide The Constitutionality Of Such Awards, Hironari Momioka

Cleveland State Law Review

Using data from punitive damages decisions of U.S. federal circuit courts from 2004 to 2012, this paper attempts to establish empirically the following: (1) there is no apparent statistical difference between the levels of jury and judge awards; (2) U.S. Supreme Court decisions such as Philip Morris (2007) or Exxon (2008) do not actually or substantially affect the level of punitive damage awards; (3) with regard to the cases involving remittitur, or reduction of awards, the Exxon decision did not radically affect the decreasing ratio of punitive to compensatory damage awards; (4) as the levels of compensatory awards ...

Tropiezos En La Formación Del Contrato: Ruptura De Las Tratativas Y El Enfoque De La Responsabilidad Aplicable, Lucero Celeste Ramírez Izaguirre

Lucero Celeste Ramírez Izaguirre

El Carácter Relativo De La Presunción Mater Semper Certa Est En Los Supuestos De Maternidad Subrogada. A Propósito De Una Reciente Sentencia, Marco Andrei Torres Maldonado

Marco Andrei Torres Maldonado

Klabacka V. Nelson, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 24 (May 25, 2017), Christopher Kelly

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) family courts have subject matter jurisdiction in divorce proceedings that involve issues otherwise outside the scope of family courts, (2) parol evidence may not be considered to determine party intent to form separate property agreements and self-settled spendthrift trusts where the written agreements are valid and unambiguous, (3) a court order equalizing assets between different spendthrift trusts is improper because the NRS protects against court orders that move assets from trusts and against moves that do not benefit trust beneficiaries, (4) spendthrift trusts may not be reached for payment of personal obligations not known at ...

The Pro Bono Collaborative Project Spotlight 05-23-2017, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Pro Bono Collaborative Staff Publications

No abstract provided.

Personal Injury Law, Defense V. Plaintiff: A Return To Civility, Daniel Stiffler, Jamie Finizio Bascombe

Law Center Plus Seminar Series

This particular seminar is designed to educate attorneys on the importance of communicating and navigating a civil case while maintaining a level of professionalism, civility, and integrity to the profession, opposing party, and the court. Learning Outcomes include:

1. How to maintain a level of civility while competently represent clients in civil cases in Florida
2. Review standards of conduct in the context of a lawyer’s responsibility to perceive and protect the image of the profession

The Florida Bar CLE credits - General 2.0, Ethics 0.5 The Florida Bar Certification Credits - Civil Trial 2.0

Who Needs To Know? The Seventh Circuit Accepts Information Sent To Government As Publicly Disclosed In Cause Of Action V. Chicago Transit Authority, Kurtis Brown

Boston College Law Review

On February 29, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Cause of Action v. Chicago Transit Authority held that information disclosed to a government official and acted upon by that official has been publicly disclosed, barring a qui tam action from being brought under the False Claims Act. Several other circuits, including the First, Fourth, and Sixth, in contrast, have all interpreted the public disclosure bar within the False Claims Act to require a disclosure of information beyond the government. This Comment argues that the majority of circuit courts have correctly interpreted the False Claims ...

As A Matter Of Fact: Factual Methodology In Obergefell V. Hodges And Its Implications For Public Policy, Clint Hamilton

The Kabod

What are the implications of the confusing decision the Supreme Court reached in Obergefell v. Hodges that challenged the definition of marriage as legal bond between a man and a woman. Much of this confusion has arisen because instead of following the usual factual methodology to reach this groundbreaking (and very controversial) decision, the Supreme Court used an abnormal pattern of fact-finding. The use of abnormal methodology resulted in many complicated and tumultuous policy questions at both the State and National levels of government. This paper investigates both the methodology that resulted in the Supreme Court’s decision and its ...

Sex Reassignment Surgery & The New Standard Of Care: An Analysis Of The Role The Federal Court System, The States, Society, And The Medical Community Serve In Paving The Way For Incarcerated Transgendered Persons' Constitutional Right To A Sex Change, Victor J. Genchi

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.