Law Commons^™

Pretext Or Pretext-Plus: What Must A Plaintiff Prove To Win A Title Vii Lawsuit? An Analysis Of St. Mary's Honor Center V. Hicks, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502 (1993). The author expected the Court to address whether, in the context of an employment discrimination case under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a plaintiff should prevail upon proof that the legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons advanced by the defendant as its motives for an adverse employment action are pretextural.

National Socialism And The Rule Of Law, Donald P. Kommers

Journal Articles

Ingo Muller's book, originally published in 1987 as Furchtbare Juristen: Die unbewaltigte Vergangenheit unserer Justiz (literally "Dreadful Jurists: The Remorseless Past of Our Judiciary"), describes the moral collapse of the German legal profession and its role in facilitating the construction and maintenance of the Nazi regime. Gracefully translated by Deborah Lucas Schneider, Hitler's Justice seeks, first, to show how legal professionals betrayed their trust as lawyers, prosecutors, and judges and, second, to assess the degree to which Germany in the postwar period reformed its legal system, purged the judiciary of former Nazis, and rededicated itself to the rule of law. …

Does Title Vii Apply In Saudi Arabia? An Analysis Of Eeoc V. Arabian American Oil Co., Barbara J, Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case EEOC v. Arabian American Oil Co., 499 U.S. 244 (1991). The author expected the Court to decied whether Congress intended the mandates of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibiting employment discrimination to extend extraterritorially.

Breaching The Union Constitution: Can A Member Make A Federal Case Of It? An Analysis Of Wooddell V. Ibew Local Union No. 71, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Wooddell v. IBEW Local Union No. 71, 502 U.S. 93 (1991). The author expected the Court to address whether Section 301 of the Labor Relations Management Act creates a federal cause of action under which a union member can sue his union for breach of the union's constitution.

Dispute Processing And A Longitudinal Approach To Trial Courts, Lynn Mather

Journal Articles

This article suggests ways to integrate the insights and findings of two rather distinct fields: docket-based, longitudinal studies of trial courts and studies of dispute processing. In particular, I argue that longitudinal research on courts would benefit enormously from the incorporation of concepts and data on dispute processing. For example, instead of taking court cases as the starting point for study, longitudinal research should explore the multistage and transformative nature of disputing. Historical data should also be collected on the nature of the relationships between opposing litigants, on the roles played by participants other than the litigants (lawyers, supporters, audiences, …

Litigation Across Space And Time: Courts, Conflict, And Social Change, David M. Engel

Journal Articles

One of the problems facing researchers who have studied courts across time and space has been the cultural variability of seemingly uniform analytic categories, including conceptions of time and space themselves. This article proposes that we take such variations in meaning as a starting point for comparative studies of courts and social change rather than viewing them as were "noise" in the system. Litigation in Chiangmai, Thailand, is presented as an example. Changing conceptions of "space" in Thailand from the nineteenth century to the present illustrate the transformation of legal and political authority as well as the proliferation of normative …

Free Speech And Compulsory Union Fees: An Analysis Of Lehnert V. Ferris Faculty Association, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Ass'n, 500 U.S. 507 (1991). The author expected the case to address the line between those types of activities that effectuate a union's duties as collective bargaining representative, and thus can be charged to non-members, and those activities that are not related to collective bargaining and therefore are not chargeable to objecting non-members.

Peer Review: I'Ll Give You My Opinion If You Don't Tell Anyone What It Is: An Analysis Of University Of Pennsylvania V. Eeoc, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case University of Pennsylvania v. EEOC, 493 U.S. 192 (1990). The author expected the Court to decide whether the EEOC may subpeopna peer review documents submitted to a university tenure committee when investigating charges that the committee engaged in impermissible discrimination when denying tenure to an associate professor.

Who Pays The Piper If You Cut Into The Dance? An Analysis Of Independent Federation Of Flight Attendants V. Zipes, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Indpendent Federation of Flight Attendants v. Zipes, 491 U.S. 754 (1989). The author expected the Court to address what standard the courts should apply in deciding whether to assess attorney's fees against an unsuccessful intervenor in federal employment discrimination cases.

Of Time Limits, Worksharing And Deferral: An Analysis Of Eeoc V. Commercial Office Products Co., Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case EEOC v. Commercial Office Products Co., 486 U.S. 107 (1988). The author expected the Court to address the following issue: When a state civil rights agency decides to defer processing an employment discrimination charge to the EEOC, has the agency "terminated" its proceedings so that the charge will be deemed filed with the EEOC for purposes of calculating the statute of limitations?

May A Federal Court Remand A Case To State Court After Federal Claims Have Been Deleted?, Joseph P. Bauer

Journal Articles

This Article provides a preview of Carnegie-Mellon University v. Honorable Maurice B. Cohill, Jr., argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on November 10, 1987. This case concerns the circumstances under which a lawsuit, properly commenced in a state court and then removed before trial to a federal court, may be sent back (remanded) to the state court.

On one level, this case seems only to involve technical interpretations of federal statutes governing procedure in the federal courts. At another level, however, it involves more general and important issues. Among these are how to allocate judicial power …

Labor Law Preemption: Procedure And Substance: An Analysis Of International Longshoremen's Association V. Davis, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n v. Davis, 476 U.S. 380 (1986). The author expected the Court to address 2 issues: (1) at what point in a case must the issue of federal preemption be raised?; and (2) to what extent is state law preempted by federal labor law?

The Struggle For Judicial Independence In Antebellum North Carolina: The Story Of Two Judges, Walter F. Pratt

Journal Articles

The Supreme Court of North Carolina is an anomaly among state courts in the antebellum years. In a period dominated by democratic reforms of state government, the court did not merely survive unscathed it actually increased its independence. The remarkable success of this court is largely attributable to the personal reputations and political acumen of two of its judges, Thomas Ruffin and William Gaston. Without those two men it is likely that the Supreme Court would have been abolished in a wave of democratic reforms that peaked in North Carolina with the constitutional amendments of 1835.

Imagining The Past And Remembering The Future: The Supreme Court's History Of The Establishment Clause, Gerard V. Bradley

Journal Articles

Our Framers through the Establishment Clause sought to prevent the government from preferring one religious sect to another. However, the Supreme Court in Everson v. Board of Education abandoned that meaning of nonestablishment and created a general prohibition on all nondiscriminatory aid to religion, a decision later reinforced in Lemon v. Kurtzman. This Article discusses the Founder’s worldview and looks at other Establishment Clause cases to illustrate that the historical evidence is inconsistent with Everson. Rather, the founders intended to assure that religion would be aided only on a nondiscriminatory, or sect-neutral, basis and does not stand for …

The Circle Of Boys Market: A Comment On Judicial Inventiveness, James B. Atleson

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.

Labor Racketeering And Labor Law: State Regulation V. Federal Rights: An Analysis Of Brown V. Hotel And Restaurant Employees Union Local 54, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Brown v. Hotel and Restaurant Employees, 468 U.S. 491 (1984). The author expected the Court to decide which interest prevails where there is a conflict between New Jersey's regulation of labor unions in order to reduce the influence of organized crime in the labor sector and federally granted rights to organize and bargain collectively.

Can Mother Vote In The Union Election? The Board's Authority To Define The Appropriate Bargaining Unit: An Analysis Of Nlrb V. Action Automotive, Inc., Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case NLRB v. Action Automotive, Inc., 469 U.S. 490 (1985). The author expected the Court to address whether the NLRB can exclude from the bargaining unit an employee-relative of the owners/managers of a closely held corporation when that employee does not enjoy any special work benefits because of that relationship.

Withdrawing Jurisdiction From Federal Courts, Charles E. Rice

Journal Articles

Courts today accept two incorrect assumptions when interpreting the federal constitution. First, they assume that the judiciary is the sole branch with the definitive power in interpreting the Constitution. Second, they assume that the Supreme Court's decisions on constitutional interpretation are the law of the land and equal to the language of the Constitution itself. This Article proposes that Congress ought to exercise its removal power of appellate jurisdiction from the federal courts in certain areas of law to limit the Supreme Court’s power in creating law that expands the Constitution, which is mistakenly viewed today with equal stature as …

Beyond Cases: Reconsidering Judicial Review, Janet S. Lindgren

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.

The Mandamus Power Of The United States Courts Of Appeals: A Complex And Confused Means Of Appellate Control, Robert S. Berger

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.

Congress And The Supreme Court's Jurisdiction, Charles E. Rice

Journal Articles

When a ruling of the supreme court meets with Congressional disfavor there are several remedies available to Congress. If the decision is not on a constitutional level, a later statutory enactment will suffice to reverse or modify the ruling. If, however, the Court's decision is an interpretation of a constitutional mandate, such as the requirement of the fourteenth amendment that legislative districts be apportioned according to population, then a statute could not reverse the decision because the statute itself would be subject to that constitutional mandate as defined by the Court.

The obvious method of reversing a Supreme Court interpretation …

World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. V. Woodson: Reflections On The Road Ahead, Kenneth F. Ripple, Mollie A. Murphy

Journal Articles

During its past several terms the Supreme Court of the United States has, after a long period of inactivity, engaged in a reexamination of the constitutional limitations on state court jurisdiction. Last term, in World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, this reexamination reached a new plateau. Woodson significantly elucidated the constitutional policy considerations underlying this area. Yet, as so often occurs in constitutional litigation, the resolution of old doubts has also brought into sharper focus other yet unresolved issues.

This article has two purposes. First, it will assess the significance of Woodson in the overall doctrinal development of jurisdictional standards. Second, …

Article Iii Limits On Article I Courts: The Constitutionality Of The Bankruptcy Court And The 1979 Magistrates Act, Lucinda M. Finley

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.

Rhetorical Styles On The Fuller Court, Walter F. Pratt

Journal Articles

"Formalism" is the label regularly used to describe judicial opinions of the late nineteenth century. The label is descriptive when used in contradistinction to "instrumentalism." Use of the label, however, has certain drawbacks. For example, there is little objective or empirical evidence to support the application of the two antithetical terms. In addition, a single term cannot reflect whatever diversity of styles may exist among the judges of a single court. This article describes the results of an attempt to rectify those two drawbacks and to determine whether the Justices of the Supreme Court at the turn of the century—while …

Sentencing In Indiana: Appellate Review Of The Trial Court's Discretion, John Eric Smithburn

Journal Articles

Two significant developments, legislative and judicial, have taken place in Indiana criminal law in recent months which may offer an effective response to the problem of unguided discretionary sentencing. The Indiana Penal Code has been revised to require that the trial court, before sentencing a convicted felon, conduct a separate hearing for the purpose of determining the appropriate sentence and to make a record of the hearing which must include a statement of the court's reasons for selecting the sentence imposed. The General Assembly has also provided specific directives which the trial court must consider in determining a proper sentence …

Justiciability And Theories Of Judicial Review: A Remote Relationship, Lee A. Albert

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.

Judicial Review: Its Influence Abroad, Donald P. Kommers

Journal Articles

The doctrine of judicial review, having been nourished in a legal culture and socio-political environment favorable to its growth, is America’s most distinctive contribution to constitutional government. Judicial review as historically practiced in the United States was duly recorded abroad, with varying degrees of influence and acceptability. During the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the influence of judicial review was most conspicuous in Latin America, where it was adopted as an articulate principle of numerous national constitutions, while most European nations consciously rejected it as incompatible with the prevailing theory of separation of powers. Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, although marginally …

Comparative Judicial Review And Constitutional Politics, Donald P. Kommers

Journal Articles

Donald P. Kommers reviews Richard D. Baker's Judicial Review in Mexico: A Study of the Amparo Suit (Austin and London: University of Texas Press, 1971); B. L. Strayer's Judicial Review of Legislation in Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1968); Heinz Laufer's Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit und politischer Prozess (Tiibingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck ], 1968); Mauro Cappelletti's Judicial Review in the Contemporary World (Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., 1971); Edward McWhinney's Judicial Review (4th ed.) (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1969); Richard E. Johnston's The Effect of Judicial Review on Federal-State Relations in Australia, Canada, and the United States (Baton Rouge: Louisiana …

Abortion: The Court Decides A Non-Case, Joseph O'Meara

Journal Articles

It took the Supreme Court 105 years to discover that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees a personal right of privacy that invalidates state statutes forbidding abortion except to save the mother's life. As Mr. Justice Rehnquist pointed out, in a dissent that no member of the Court attempted to answer, at least thirty-six states had such anti-abortion statutes when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted. None was attacked on the ground that they offended the newly adopted amendment. The only conclusion possible from this history is that the drafters did not intend to have the Fourteenth Amendment withdraw from the States the …

Obscenity In The Supreme Court: A Note On Jacobellis V. Ohio, Joseph O'Meara, Thomas L. Shaffer

Journal Articles

According to the opinion of Mr. Justice Brennan in Jacobellis v. Ohio, the Supreme Court itself must weigh and decide the issues in obscenity cases; it must decide whether the disputed material is obscene; and it must decide this according to the standards of the community, that is, the whole country—all 50 States. In other words, the Court must apply a national standard. This note is addressed primarily to that opinion.