Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Law (5377)
- International Law (487)
- Intellectual Property Law (418)
- Criminal Law (253)
- Constitutional Law (234)
-
- Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law (199)
- Business Organizations Law (183)
- Banking and Finance Law (154)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (122)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (98)
- Courts (97)
- Environmental Law (97)
- Law and Society (93)
- Judges (81)
- Administrative Law (78)
- State and Local Government Law (70)
- Legislation (64)
- Business (62)
- Criminal Procedure (62)
- Law and Politics (61)
- Securities Law (60)
- Supreme Court of the United States (60)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (56)
- Civil Procedure (55)
- Legal History (55)
- Legal Profession (53)
- Litigation (53)
- First Amendment (52)
- Accounting Law (51)
- Jurisprudence (50)
- Keyword
-
- Ethics (148)
- Constitution (94)
- Antitrust (70)
- Fordham Law Student Newspaper (70)
- Constitutional law (69)
-
- Copyright (67)
- Criminal law (64)
- Regulation (62)
- Securities (62)
- Privacy (56)
- Evidence (54)
- First Amendment (54)
- Tax (54)
- Constitutional Law (51)
- New York (49)
- Originalism (48)
- Religion (48)
- Property (47)
- Bankruptcy (46)
- Justice (44)
- Law (43)
- Litigation (42)
- Race (42)
- Discrimination (41)
- SEC (41)
- First amendment (39)
- Fraud (39)
- Patent (39)
- Professional responsibility (39)
- Supreme Court (39)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Fordham Law Review (2429)
- Parole Administrative Appeal Decisions (1233)
- Fordham Urban Law Journal (903)
- All Decisions (799)
- Faculty Scholarship (652)
-
- Fordham International Law Journal (606)
- Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings (360)
- Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal (350)
- Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law (217)
- Parole Interview Transcripts and Decisions (198)
- Fordham Environmental Law Review (169)
- The Advocate (74)
- COMPAS Risk Assessments (58)
- Fordham Law Review Online (47)
- Art. 78 Petitions (37)
- Law School Bulletins 1905-2000 (36)
- Art. 78 Responses (29)
- Parole Administrative Appeal Briefs (28)
- Parole Board Reports (28)
- 27th Annual Intellectual Property Law & Policy Conference (2019) (24)
- 28th Annual Intellectual Property Law & Policy Conference (2021) (20)
- Reports (19)
- Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum (18)
- Fordham Lawyer (18)
- 29th Annual Intellectual Property Law & Policy Conference (2022) (17)
- Congressional Materials (16)
- Faculty Bibliography (15)
- Fordham Competition Law Institute (14)
- Amicus Briefs (13)
- Res Gestae (13)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 2161 - 2190 of 8594
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The Independent State Legislature Doctrine, Michael T. Morley
The Independent State Legislature Doctrine, Michael T. Morley
Fordham Law Review
The U.S. Constitution grants authority to both regulate congressional elections and determine the manner in which a state chooses its presidential electors specifically to the legislature of each state, rather than to the state as an entity. The independent state legislature doctrine teaches that, because a legislature derives its power over federal elections directly from the Constitution in this manner, that authority differs in certain important respects from the legislature’s general police powers that it exercises under the state constitution. Although the doctrine was applied on several occasions in the nineteenth century, it largely fell into desuetude in the years …
A Roadmap For Foreign Official Immunity Cases In U.S. Courts, William S. Dodge, Chimène I. Keitner
A Roadmap For Foreign Official Immunity Cases In U.S. Courts, William S. Dodge, Chimène I. Keitner
Fordham Law Review
This Article provides a roadmap for cases involving foreign official immunity in U.S. courts. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Samantar v. Yousuf that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) does not govern the immunity of foreign officials. Since Samantar, dozens of decisions have addressed questions of foreign official immunity. Yet, U.S. courts often seem lost. They frequently fail to engage with the customary international law rules of foreign official immunity, instead reaching back to an outdated provision of the 1965 Restatement (Second) of Foreign Relations Law. Courts are divided on how much deference to give …
Stronger Than Ever: New York’S Rent Stabilization System Survives Another Legal Challenge, Charles K. Gehnrich
Stronger Than Ever: New York’S Rent Stabilization System Survives Another Legal Challenge, Charles K. Gehnrich
Fordham Law Review
The fate of New York’s rent stabilization laws (RSL) directly concerns millions of New York City residents who take shelter in the protection of the RSL from the hardships and unfair business practices that accompany an unregulated housing market during a housing crisis. After the New York State Legislature made these tenant protections stronger than ever before in 2019, affected landlords responded by petitioning the courts to dismantle the entire rent regulation regime. A federal district court in the Eastern District of New York rejected the landlords’ broad constitutional challenge in Community Housing Improvement Project v. City of New York …
Choose Your Words Carefully: Reimagining Retaliatory Arrest After Nieves V. Bartlett, Ryan Hor
Choose Your Words Carefully: Reimagining Retaliatory Arrest After Nieves V. Bartlett, Ryan Hor
Fordham Law Review
In the summer of 2020, the United States experienced potentially its largest ever social movement in the protests against racial inequality. Predictably, protestors clashed with law enforcement officers, often leading to arrests. Arrested individuals could bring § 1983 retaliatory arrest claims alleging that the officers deprived them of their First Amendment right to free speech. Such claims underline the tension between two vital interests: free speech and law enforcement effectiveness. In 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Nieves v. Bartlett, which crafted a new framework for retaliatory arrest claims that consequently diminished a plaintiff’s chance to prevail and recover …
Cacophony Or Concerto?: Analyzing The Applicability Of The Wiretap Act’S Party Exception For Duplicate Get Requests, David Koenig
Cacophony Or Concerto?: Analyzing The Applicability Of The Wiretap Act’S Party Exception For Duplicate Get Requests, David Koenig
Fordham Law Review
The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (“Wiretap Act”) prohibits the intentional interception of an electronic communication. However, “parties to a communication” can intercept a communication without Wiretap Act liability. Parties include the intended recipients of a communication. When internet users navigate the internet, they communicate with websites using GET requests. The users’ GET requests call out to websites and websites respond by providing the websites’ content to the users. During this process, websites receive user data. This data can include information about the website visited, the search terms used to locate the website, and referral data identifying the last web page …
Free And Fair: Judicial Intervention In Elections Beyond The Purcell Principle And Anderson-Burdick Balancing, Danika Elizabeth Watson
Free And Fair: Judicial Intervention In Elections Beyond The Purcell Principle And Anderson-Burdick Balancing, Danika Elizabeth Watson
Fordham Law Review
The United States’s politically charged 2020 federal election, conducted in the midst of a global pandemic, seismically shook the fault lines of state and local elections administration nationwide. Voters, candidates, parties, states, and political campaigns brought hundreds of claims to the courts, seeking judicial intervention to protect equity in their voting rights. The 2020 pandemic election cases demonstrated that Equal Protection claims relying on the Anderson-Burdick balancing test are both overly reliant on judicial discretion and highly vulnerable to invalidation under the Purcell principle. This Note examines the equal protection challenges raised in courts throughout the country in 2020 to …
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - O'Connor, Raymond (2021-09-29)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - O'Connor, Raymond (2021-09-29)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Collaterally Attacking The Prison Litigation Reform Act's Application To Meritorious Prisoner Civil Litigation, Melissa Benerofe
Collaterally Attacking The Prison Litigation Reform Act's Application To Meritorious Prisoner Civil Litigation, Melissa Benerofe
Fordham Law Review
Earlier this year, the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) reached its twenty-fifth birthday, reinvigorating discussion on its effects on people in prison and the U.S. criminal justice system more broadly. This Note examines how the PLRA deters and obstructs prisoners’ ability to file meritorious civil rights lawsuits regarding the conditions of their confinement. The PLRA does so primarily through four of its provisions, which this Note refers to as the “access provisions.” The access provisions include: (1) the exhaustion of administrative remedies; (2) the filing fee provision; (3) the three-strikes rule; and (4) limitations on attorney’s fees. This Note argues …
Corporate Law's Forgotten Constituents: Reimagining Corporate Lawyering In Routine Business Contexts, Melissa E. Romanovich
Corporate Law's Forgotten Constituents: Reimagining Corporate Lawyering In Routine Business Contexts, Melissa E. Romanovich
Fordham Law Review
Although they are artificial entities, corporations are operated, managed, and represented by people. Sometimes, these people have personal interests at stake—interests that are separate and distinct from the corporation’s interests and that arise from these people acting in their corporate roles. These personal interests and related potential liabilities range from employment concerns and civil liability to criminal prosecution and imprisonment. Until now, however, the law has determined that, in most situations, a corporation’s lawyer neither represents the corporation’s constituents nor their personal interests. The corporate lawyer, therefore, has the challenging role of discharging the proper ethical and legal obligations to …
Disability Without Documentation, Katherine A. Macfarlane
Disability Without Documentation, Katherine A. Macfarlane
Fordham Law Review
Disability exists regardless of whether a doctor has confirmed its existence. Yet in the American workplace, employees are not disabled, or entitled to reasonable accommodations, until a doctor says so. This Article challenges the assumption that requests for reasonable accommodations must be supported by medical proof of disability. It proposes an accommodation process that accepts individuals’ assessments of their disabilities and defers to their accommodation preferences. A documentation-free model is not alien to employment law. In evaluating religious accommodations, employers—and courts—take a hands-off approach to employees’ representations that their religious beliefs are sincere. Disability deserves the same deference. This Article …
Dinsay V. Akelius Real Estate Mgmt Llc
Dinsay V. Akelius Real Estate Mgmt Llc
All Decisions
Landlord asked the court to grant it additional time to comply with a court order to correct Class C HPD violations. Tenant filed an opposition and cross-motion for an order directing the landlord to complete corrections within the original order's timeframe and to install "remedial safety measures" while repairs are ongoing. The court granted the landlord a 3-month extension to complete all repairs and ordered the landlord to install remedial safety measures to improve ventilation and air quality in the meantime.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wooldridge, Vaughn (2010-08-17)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wooldridge, Vaughn (2010-08-17)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wise, Anthony F. (2007-12-31)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wise, Anthony F. (2007-12-31)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Winchell, Craig (2010-06-09)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Winchell, Craig (2010-06-09)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Winkler, Stuart (2012-08-27)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Winkler, Stuart (2012-08-27)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wilson, Domingo (2010-09-02)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wilson, Domingo (2010-09-02)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wilson, Kevin (2015-09-11)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wilson, Kevin (2015-09-11)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Williams, Joseph (2007-09-25)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Williams, Joseph (2007-09-25)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Williams, Rudolph (2017-09-06)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Williams, Rudolph (2017-09-06)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Williams, Antonio (2015-06-25)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Williams, Antonio (2015-06-25)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Williams, Dorphus (2013-05-21)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Williams, Dorphus (2013-05-21)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wigfall, Joseph (2013-09-30)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wigfall, Joseph (2013-09-30)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wiley, Tonie (2015-04-09)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wiley, Tonie (2015-04-09)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - West, Michael G. (2013-09-24)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - West, Michael G. (2013-09-24)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Washington, James (2011-11-16)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Washington, James (2011-11-16)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Walker, Sherman (2013-02-04)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Walker, Sherman (2013-02-04)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Ventura, Charles (2011-11-22)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Ventura, Charles (2011-11-22)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Valverde, John (2007-06-08)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Valverde, John (2007-06-08)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Utsey, Charles (2013-07-05)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Utsey, Charles (2013-07-05)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Turner, Afi (2009-06-24)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Turner, Afi (2009-06-24)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.