Courts Commons^™

Less Mischief, Not None: Respecting Federalism, Respecting States And Respecting Judges In Diversity Jurisdiction Cases, Doris Deltosto Brogan

Doris DelTosto Brogan

Abstract: In 2009, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit decided Berrier v. Simplicity, a tragic, but otherwise modest personal injury diversity case that was brought under Pennsylvania products liability law. The Third Circuit predicted that Pennsylvania would adopt the Restatement (Third) of Torts, and abandon what everyone (including several members of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court) considered an incomprehensible products liability jurisprudence that had evolved under Pennsylvania’s interpretation of the Restatement (Second). But for five years the Pennsylvania Supreme Court did not adopt the Restatement (Third), despite several opportunities to do so. Yet during those years, the Third Circuit …

A Government Of Laws Not Of Precedents 1776-1876: The Google Challenge To Common Law Myth, James Maxeiner

James R Maxeiner

Conventional wisdom holds that the United States is a common law country of precedents where, until the 20th century (the “Age of Statutes”), statutes had little role. Digitization by Google and others of previously hard to find legal works of the 19th century challenges this common law myth. At the Centennial in 1876 Americans celebrated that “The great fact in the progress of American jurisprudence … is its tendency towards organic statute law and towards the systematizing of law; in other words, towards written constitutions and codification.” This article tests the claim of the Centennial Writers of 1876 and finds …

Unreasonable Doubt: Warren Hill, Aedpa, And The Unconstitutionality Of Georgia's Reasonable Doubt Standard, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

Georgia’s “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard for determining intellectual disability has led to an absurd—and arbitrary—result. A Georgia state court held that defendant Warren Hill was intellectually disabled, yet still sentenced Hill to death. Seven experts—and the court—deemed Hill disabled under a preponderance of the evidence standard. He remains on death row, however, because Georgia’s “preposterous burden of proof” requires that intellectual disability be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, a standard experts have said is nearly impossible to satisfy. It “effectively limits the constitutional right protected in Atkins,” and creates a conditional, not categorical, ban.

Free Expression, In-Group Bias, And The Court's Conservatives: A Critique Of The Epstein-Parker-Segal Study, Todd E. Pettys

Todd E. Pettys

In a recent, widely publicized study, a prestigious team of political scientists concluded that there is strong evidence of ideological in-group bias among the Supreme Court’s members in First Amendment free-expression cases, with the current four most conservative justices being the Roberts Court’s worst offenders. Beneath the surface of the authors’ conclusions, however, one finds a surprisingly sizable combination of coding errors, superficial case readings, and questionable judgments about litigants’ ideological affiliations. Many of those problems likely flow either from shortcomings that reportedly afflict the Supreme Court Database (the data set that nearly always provides the starting point for empirical …

Deciding, Curtis E.A. Karnow

Curtis E.A. Karnow

Review of cognitive fallacies judges may encounter, such as expectation fallacies, cognitive dissonance, narrative fallacies and generally problems with associative reasoning

Court-Led Educational Reforms In Political Third Rails: Lessons From The Litigation Over Ultra-Religious Jewish Schools In Israel, Lotem Perry Dr.

Dr. Lotem Perry-Hazan

This paper offers a model for evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of judicial involvement in educational reforms. It uses the model to analyze two case studies of court-led educational reforms in the third rail of Israeli politics –– the curricula and the admission policies of ultra-Othodox (Haredi) schools. These case studies are located at the knotty junction of human rights, religion, and politics in education policy, generating concern in many countries. The conclusions demonstrate that that even when the courts are cautious, judicial involvement in third rail educational reforms may produce impacts that drive the cogwheels of policy-making in directions …

The Curious, Perjurious Requirements Of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 12(B)(3)., Wm. Dennis Huber

Wm. Dennis Huber

A 2010 survey of Illinois Civil Procedure discussed recent amendments to the Illinois Supreme Court Rules that apply to civil practice issues.1 The survey began with Notices of Appeal and a substantial part of the survey of Notices of Appeal was devoted to Secura Insurance Co. v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co.2 The purpose of this Article is to examine in greater depth the requirements of filing notices of appeal under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 12(b)(3) and the corresponding proof of service of Rule 373.

Illinois Supreme Court Rule 12(b)(3) has what can only be called “curious, perjurious requirements.” They are …

Negotiating Federalism And The Structural Constitution: Navigating The Separation Of Powers Both Vertically And Horizontally (A Response To Aziz Huq), Erin Ryan

Erin Ryan

This essay explores the emerging literature on the negotiation of structural constitutional governance, to which Professor Aziz Huq has made an important contribution in The Negotiated Structural Constitution, 114 Colum. L. Rev. 1595 (2014). In the piece, Professor Huq reviews the negotiation of constitutional entitlements and challenges the conventional wisdom about the limits of political bargaining as a means of allocating authority among the three branches of government. He argues that constitutional ambiguities in the horizontal allocation of power are sometimes best resolved through legislative-executive negotiation, just as uncertain grants of constitutional authority are already negotiated between state and federal …

Choosing A Court To Review The Executive, Joseph Mead, Nicholas Fromherz

All Maxine Goodman Levin School of Urban Affairs Publications

For more than one hundred years, Congress has experimented with review of agency action by single-judge district courts, multiple-judge district courts, and direct review by circuit courts. This tinkering has not given way to a stable design. Rather than settling on a uniform scheme—or at least a scheme with a discernible organizing principle—Congress has left litigants with a jurisdictional maze that varies unpredictably across and within statutes and agencies.In this Article, we offer a fresh look at the theoretical and empirical factors that ought to inform the allocation of the judicial power between district and circuit courts in suits challenging …

Sentencing Rules And Standards: How We Decide Criminal Punishment, Jacob Schuman

Tennessee Law Review

Over the past 300 years, American sentencing policy has alternated between "determinate" and "indeterminate" systems of deciding punishment. Debates over sentence determinacy have so far focused on three main questions: Who should decide punishment? What makes punishment fair? Why should we punish wrongdoers at all?

In this Article, I ask a new, fourth question: How should we decide punishment? First, I demonstrate that determinate sentencing uses rules to decide sentences, while indeterminate sentencing relies on standards. Next, I show how the trigger-based nature of rules-in contrast to the qualitative character of standards-makes them vulnerable to four different kinds of substantive …

Equity And Corporate Law, Mark J. Loewenstein

Publications

The article explores the continuing relevance of the 1991 Delaware Supreme Court decision in Schnell v. Chris-Craft Industries, Inc., in particular the extent to which evolving concepts of good faith have, or should, displace the free-wheeling equity doctrine of Schnell.

From Commitment To Compliance: Enforceability Of Remedial Orders Of African Human Rights Bodies, Roger-Claude Liwanga

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

Over the last seven decades, there has been a global proliferation of international and regional human rights tribunals. But with no coercive power to enforce their judgments, these international tribunals rely either on the good faith of the State parties or on the political process for the implementation of their remedial orders. This nonjudicial approach to enforcement has showed its limits, as most State parties are noncompliant with international judgments to the detriment of human rights victims. This article recommends a new approach involving the judicialization of the post-adjudicative stage of international proceedings as an avenue to increase the enforceability …

Three Hundred Nos: An Empirical Analysis Of The First 300+ Denials Of Institution For Inter Partes And Covered Business Method Patent Reviews Prior To In Re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, Llc, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 112 (2015), Jarrad Wood, Jonathan Stroud

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Tasked in 2011 with creating powerful new patent review trial regimes, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office—through the efforts of their freshly empowered quasi-judicial body, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board—set to creating a fast-paced trial with limited discovery and concentrated efficiency. For two years, the proceedings have proved potent, holding unpatentable many of the claims that reached decisions on the merits. Yet a small subsection of petitions never make it past the starting gate, resulting in wasted time and effort on the parts of petitioners—and likely sighs of relief from the rights-holders. The AIA exempted institution decisions from appellate …

America The Eusocial, 49 New Eng. L. Rev. On Remand 71 (2015), Timothy P. O'Neill

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

What’S Law Got To Do With It? Confronting Judicial Nullification Of Domestic Violence Remedies, 10 Nw. J. L. & Soc. Pol'y. 130 (2015), Debra Pogrund Stark

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

In 1982, the Illinois legislature passed the Illinois Domestic Violence Act (the Act) and most recently passed an updated version in 2012. This Article examines how the specialized domestic violence courthouse in Chicago implements these laws.

Where the courthouse falls short, this Article will explore why, what can be done, and consider implications for other jurisdictions seeking to implement similar resources for survivors of domestic violence. The results from this empirical study are mixed. On the positive side, the data reflect that judges are properly applying many important aspects of the new order of protection laws and granting a high …

The Complexity Of International Criminal Trials Is Necessary, 48 Geo. Wash. Int'l L. Rev. 151 (2015), Stuart Ford

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

There is a widespread belief among both academics and policymakers that international criminal trials are too complex. As a result, tribunals have come under enormous pressure to reduce the complexity of their trials. However, changes to trial procedure have not meaningfully affected trial complexity. This Article explains why these changes have failed and argues that the complexity of international criminal trials is necessary for them to achieve their purposes.

Using a multiple regression model of the factors driving trial complexity at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), this Article shows that the largest drivers of complexity are …

Gossiping About Judges, Jordan M. Singer

Florida State University Law Review

Gossip about judges is an essential source of information to civil litigators. Hearing third party assessments of a judge’s personality, demeanor, intelligence, curiosity, and openness to new interpretations of the law can substantially affect a lawyer’s strategic decisions during the course of litigation, and sometimes whether litigation occurs at all. Yet gossip about judges rarely merits mention and has evaded serious study. This Article brings attorney gossip about judges out into the open, identifying its strategic benefits and drawbacks and explaining how attorneys use gossip (and other secondhand information on judges) to anticipate the likely outcome of judicial decisions. It …

How The Federal Cause Of Action Relates To Rights, Remedies, And Jurisdiction, John F. Preis

Law Faculty Publications

Time and again, the U.S. Supreme Court has declared that the federal cause of action is "analytically distinct" from rights, remedies, and jurisdiction. Yet, just pages away in the U.S. Reports are other cases in which rights, remedies, and jurisdiction all hinge on the existence of a cause of action. What, then, is the proper relationship between these concepts?

The goal of this Article is to articulate that relationship. This Article traces the history of the cause of action from eighteenth-century England to its modem usage in the federal courts. This history demonstrates that the federal cause of action is …

Filling The Federal Appellate Court Vacancies, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Multiple observers have criticized President Barack Obama’s discharge of his Article II constitutional responsibility to nominate and confirm federal judges. Senators have blamed the administration for slowly making nominations, liberals have contended that the executive appointed myriad candidates who are not sufficiently centrist, and conservatives have alleged that President Obama proffered many nominees who could become liberal judicial activists. Despite the sharp criticisms, the President has actually realized much success when nominating and confirming well qualified moderate jurists. President Obama has named more judges than Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton had at this juncture in their tenure, while …

Marriage Equality Comes To America, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Marriage equality is sweeping the nation. Four appeals courts recently affirmed district judges’ opinions which invalidated numerous state laws proscribing same-sex marriage. Yet, the Sixth Circuit reversed a number of district jurists, prompting a circuit split that provoked Supreme Court resolution. Because marriage equality’s status is unclear, this piece assesses disposition of the litigation and recommends how to clarify marriage equality.