Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Cannon v. University of Chicago (1)
- Chambers v. Mississippi (1)
- Chrysler Corporation v. Brown (1)
- Cort v. Ash (1)
- Donnelly v. United States (1)
-
- Ellison v. Commonwealth (1)
- Ernst & Ernst v. Hochfelder (1)
- Federal Corrupt Practices Act (1)
- Federal Election Campaign Act (1)
- Hines v. Commonwealth (1)
- J.I. Case Co. v. Borak (1)
- Karnes v. Commonwealth (1)
- Newberry v. Commonwealth (1)
- People v. Settles (1)
- Piper v. Chris-Craft Industries (1)
- Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez (1)
- Securities Exchange Act (1)
- Securities Investor Protection Corp. v. Barbour (1)
- Sussex Peerage Case (1)
- Texas &PacificR. Co. v. Rigsby (1)
- Transamerica Mortgage Advisors v. Lewis (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Status Of The Third Party Confession In Virginia: In Search Of A Trustworthiness Standard, Donna J. Katos
The Status Of The Third Party Confession In Virginia: In Search Of A Trustworthiness Standard, Donna J. Katos
University of Richmond Law Review
The issue of third party confessions generates great controversy. The basic inquiry is, should confessions allegedly uttered by persons other than the defendant be admitted into evidence in a criminal trial? If so, under what conditions? How much discretion should a trial judge be afforded in determining whether this evidence should be admitted to exculpate a person charged with murder, armed robbery, or rape? Should the trial judge or the jury determine the reliability of the witness, the declarant, or the content of the confession itself? These considerations, in addition to due process arguments, have troubled criminal courts, legislators, and …
Private Causes Of Action From Federal Statutes: A Strict Standard For Implication By Sole Reliance On Legislative Intent, William Francis Drewry Gallalee
Private Causes Of Action From Federal Statutes: A Strict Standard For Implication By Sole Reliance On Legislative Intent, William Francis Drewry Gallalee
University of Richmond Law Review
The implication doctrine allows a federal court to create a private cause of action from a federal statute that does not expressly provide for a private remedy. In Cort v. Ash, the Supreme Court articulated a four factor test to determine when this doctrine should be utilized. This comment will provide a brief history of the implication doctrine and of the major Supreme Court decisions that culminated in the Cort test. Relevant Supreme Court decisions after Cort,will then be examined to reveal a new, more restrictive approach to implication. Finally, reasons will be advanced that justify this stricter approach.