Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Georgia School of Law (64)
- University of Tennessee College of Law (35)
- University of Michigan Law School (23)
- Brooklyn Law School (22)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (15)
-
- University of Richmond (11)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (10)
- Fordham Law School (8)
- Notre Dame Law School (7)
- Pepperdine University (7)
- Seattle University School of Law (6)
- St. John's University School of Law (5)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (5)
- University of New Hampshire (5)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (4)
- William & Mary Law School (4)
- Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School (3)
- Osgoode Hall Law School of York University (3)
- St. Mary's University (3)
- UIC School of Law (3)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (3)
- American University Washington College of Law (2)
- Florida A&M University College of Law (2)
- Mitchell Hamline School of Law (2)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (2)
- Pace University (2)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (2)
- Seton Hall University (2)
- University of Miami Law School (2)
- University of Washington School of Law (2)
- Keyword
-
- ICJ (17)
- Judge (13)
- Courts (12)
- International Court of Justice (12)
- Litigation (11)
-
- Supreme court (10)
- Civil procedure (9)
- Discrimination (9)
- Judges (9)
- Law reform (9)
- Due process (8)
- Federal courts (8)
- Congress (7)
- Court (7)
- New York (7)
- Authority (6)
- Chief Judge (6)
- Civil rights (6)
- Constitutional Convention (6)
- Dual Constitutionalism (6)
- Judith S. Kaye (6)
- Justice Brennan (6)
- Magistrate (6)
- New York City Bar Association (6)
- New York Court of Appeals (6)
- Opportunity (6)
- Section 1983 (6)
- Skadden (6)
- Statutory interpretation (6)
- United States Supreme Court (6)
- Publication
-
- Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law (60)
- Tennessee Law Review (35)
- Touro Law Review (15)
- Brooklyn Law Review (9)
- Nevada Law Journal (9)
-
- Michigan Law Review (8)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (8)
- Notre Dame Law Review (7)
- University of Richmond Law Review (7)
- Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law (5)
- Fordham Law Review (5)
- Journal of Law and Policy (5)
- Pepperdine Law Review (5)
- The Catholic Lawyer (5)
- The University of New Hampshire Law Review (5)
- Indiana Law Journal (4)
- Michigan Journal of Race and Law (4)
- Seattle University Law Review (4)
- The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process (4)
- Brooklyn Journal of International Law (3)
- Fordham Urban Law Journal (3)
- Georgia Law Review (3)
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review (3)
- Osgoode Hall Law Journal (3)
- American Indian Law Journal (2)
- Buffalo Law Review (2)
- Florida A & M University Law Review (2)
- Mitchell Hamline Law Review (2)
- Northwestern University Law Review (2)
- Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal (2)
Articles 1 - 30 of 277
Full-Text Articles in Law
Trademarks: German Manufacturer’S Deliberate Infringement Of Domestic Trademark Sufficient To Support Injunctive Relief, But Not Supportive Of Award For Damages, Kimley R. Johnson
Trademarks: German Manufacturer’S Deliberate Infringement Of Domestic Trademark Sufficient To Support Injunctive Relief, But Not Supportive Of Award For Damages, Kimley R. Johnson
Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law
No abstract provided.
Confirm Judge Koh For The Ninth Circuit, Carl Tobias
Confirm Judge Koh For The Ninth Circuit, Carl Tobias
Washington and Lee Law Review Online
On February 25, 2016, President Barack Obama appointed United States District Court Judge Lucy Haeran Koh for a judicial emergency vacancy on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The jurist has served professionally for more than six years in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, ably resolving major litigation. Thus, White House efforts to confirm her were unsurprising. Nevertheless, 2016 is a presidential election year when delay infuses many court appointments. That conundrum was exacerbated because the United States Senate Republican majority refused to even consider United States Court of Appeals …
When You Come To A Fork In The Road, Take It: Unifying The Split In New York's Analysis Of In-House Attorney-Client Privilege, Thomas O'Connor
When You Come To A Fork In The Road, Take It: Unifying The Split In New York's Analysis Of In-House Attorney-Client Privilege, Thomas O'Connor
Journal of Law and Policy
As one surveys the vast and ever-changing landscape of law and litigation, few things stand out as so unanimously exalted and carefully guarded as the privilege protecting attorney-client communications. Yet there is today a surprising lack of uniformity and predictability in the reasoning by which New York courts determine whether a communication made by in-house counsel to its corporate client will – or will not – enjoy the protection of that privilege. Rather than follow a single and predictable analysis to resolve the question, New York courts have oscillated between one line of decisions focusing primarily on the purpose of …
If We Don’T Bring Them To Court, The Terrorists Will Have Won: Reinvigorating The Anti-Terrorist Act And General Jurisdiction In A Post-Daimler Era, Stephen J. Digregoria
If We Don’T Bring Them To Court, The Terrorists Will Have Won: Reinvigorating The Anti-Terrorist Act And General Jurisdiction In A Post-Daimler Era, Stephen J. Digregoria
Brooklyn Law Review
Prior to the Supreme Court's recent general personal jurisdiction decisions in Daimler AG v. Bauman and Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations S.A. v. Brown American terror victims, injured in terror attacks abroad, were able to bring their attackers and those who sponsor them into United States courts for relief. Specifically, groups like the Palestine Liberation Organization (the PLO) and the Palestinian Authority (the PA) had a history of being sued by American victims of terror. In the course of these suits, the PLO and the PA were regularly found subject to the personal jurisdiction of U.S. courts under a theory of …
Private Actors And Public Corruption: Why Courts Should Adopt A Broad Interpretation Of The Hobbs Act, Megan Demarco
Private Actors And Public Corruption: Why Courts Should Adopt A Broad Interpretation Of The Hobbs Act, Megan Demarco
Michigan Law Review
Federal prosecutors routinely charge public officials with “extortion under color of official right” under a public-corruption statute called the Hobbs Act. To be prosecuted under the Hobbs Act, a public official must promise official action in return for a bribe or kickback. The public official, however, does not need to have actual authority over that official action. As long as the victim reasonably believed that the public official could deliver or influence government action, the public official violated the Hobbs Act. Private citizens also solicit bribes in return for influencing official action. Yet most courts do not think the Hobbs …
Open Chambers Revisited: Demystifying The Inner Workings And Culture Of The Georgia Court Of Appeals, Stephen Louis A. Dillard
Open Chambers Revisited: Demystifying The Inner Workings And Culture Of The Georgia Court Of Appeals, Stephen Louis A. Dillard
Mercer Law Review
I was sitting in my cluttered but comfortable office, preparing for what would ultimately be my last hearing as a lawyer, when the phone rang. On the other end of the line was Governor Sonny Perdue's executive assistant: "Mr. Dillard, do you have time to speak with the governor?" I did, of course. And less than two weeks after that brief but life-changing conversation with Governor Perdue, I was one of Georgia's two newlyappointed appellate judges (and the seventy-third judge to serve on the court of appeals since 1906).
Over six years have passed now, and during that time a …
Responding To Judicial And Lawyer Misconduct: Analyzing A Survey Of State Trial Court Judges, Peter M. Koelling
Responding To Judicial And Lawyer Misconduct: Analyzing A Survey Of State Trial Court Judges, Peter M. Koelling
St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
While reported cases or incidents may give us insight into the interpretation of Rule 2.15 of the Model Code of Judicial Conduct, they do not give us a sense of how often judges undertake the obligation to act under the rule. The Judicial Division of the American Bar Association developed a survey to explore the interpretation and the implementation of Rule 2.15 of the Model Code of Judicial Conduct, and to determine how and in what manner state trial court judges responded to ethical violations by lawyers and other judges. The survey looked back over a ten-year period and was …
Taxation – Selection Of Exchange Rate For Translation Purposes -- Where Multiple Exchange Rates Exist For A Foreign Currency And The Underlying Transaction Is Financial In Nature, The Proper Rate For Translation Components Of Taxable Income Is The "Free" Market Rate (Durovic V. Commissioner Of Internal Revenue, 7th Cir. 1976), Tim J. Floyd
Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law
No abstract provided.
The Role Of The Advocate, Dr. Piero L. Frattin
The Role Of The Advocate, Dr. Piero L. Frattin
The Catholic Lawyer
No abstract provided.
The Role Of The Civil Lawyer In Church Courts, Lawrence X. Cusack
The Role Of The Civil Lawyer In Church Courts, Lawrence X. Cusack
The Catholic Lawyer
No abstract provided.
Our Prescriptive Judicial Power: Constitutive And Entrenchment Effects Of Historical Practice In Federal Courts Law, Ernest A. Young
Our Prescriptive Judicial Power: Constitutive And Entrenchment Effects Of Historical Practice In Federal Courts Law, Ernest A. Young
William & Mary Law Review
Scholars examining the use of historical practice in constitutional adjudication have focused on a few high-profile separation of powers disputes, such as the recent decisions in NLRB v. Noel Canning and Zivotofsky v. Kerry. This Article argues that “big cases make bad theory”—that the focus on high-profile cases of this type distorts our understanding of how historical practice figures into constitutional adjudication more generally. I shift focus here to the more prosaic terrain of federal courts law, where practice plays a pervasive role. That shift reveals two important insights: First, while historical practice plays an important constitutive role structuring and …
Grow Up Virginia: Time To Change Our Filial Responsibility Law, Sylvia Macon
Grow Up Virginia: Time To Change Our Filial Responsibility Law, Sylvia Macon
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Innocent Suffering: The Unavailability Of Post-Conviction Relief In Virginia Courts, Kaitlyn Potter
Innocent Suffering: The Unavailability Of Post-Conviction Relief In Virginia Courts, Kaitlyn Potter
University of Richmond Law Review
This comment examines actual innocence in Virginia: the progress it has made, the problems it still faces, and the possibilities for reform. Part I addresses past reform to the system, spurred by the shocking tales of Thomas Haynesworth and others. Part II identifies three of the most prevalent systemic challenges marring Virginia's justice system: (1) flawed scientific evidence; (2) the premature destruction of evidence; and (3) false confessions and guilty pleas. Part III suggests ways in which Virginia can, and should, address these challenges to ensure that the justice system is actually serving justice.
The Results Of Deliberation, Maggie Wittlin
The Results Of Deliberation, Maggie Wittlin
The University of New Hampshire Law Review
When evaluating whether to sue, prosecute, settle, or plead, trial lawyers must predict the future—they need to estimate how likely they are to win a given case in a given jurisdiction. Social scientists have used mock juror studies to produce a vast body of literature showing how different variables influence juror decision making. But few of these studies account for jury deliberation, so they present an impoverished picture of how these effects play out in trials and are of limited usefulness.
This Article helps lawyers better predict the future by presenting a novel computer model that extrapolates findings about jurors …
Taking Stock: Why The Supreme Court’S Decision To Apply The Market-Value Standard In Horne Ii Further Complicates The Just Compensation Requirement, Greg Seidner
The University of New Hampshire Law Review
The Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause does not prevent the federal (or a state) government from taking private property. It merely sets as a condition that the government pay the owner “just compensation” for the taking. Precisely what constitutes just compensation, however, is a tricky matter. One method for determining just compensation is the “market-value” method, which requires the government to pay the owner the property’s market value. But where a taking is only partial, that is, where the government takes only a portion of private property, the property that remains with the owner may see an increase or decrease in …
Unconventional Methods For A Traditional Setting: The Use Of Virtual Reality To Reduce Implicit Racial Bias In The Courtroom, Natalie Salmanowitz
Unconventional Methods For A Traditional Setting: The Use Of Virtual Reality To Reduce Implicit Racial Bias In The Courtroom, Natalie Salmanowitz
The University of New Hampshire Law Review
The presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial lie at the core of the United States justice system. While existing rules and practices serve to uphold these principles, the administration of justice is significantly compromised by a covert but influential factor: namely, implicit racial biases. These biases can lead to automatic associations between race and guilt, as well as impact the way in which judges and jurors interpret information throughout a trial. Despite the well-documented presence of implicit racial biases, few steps have been taken to ameliorate the problem in the courtroom setting. This Article discusses the …
Compulsory Medical Treatment - A Moral Evaluation, Robert H. Springer, S.J.
Compulsory Medical Treatment - A Moral Evaluation, Robert H. Springer, S.J.
The Catholic Lawyer
No abstract provided.
Honoring Dan Meltzer, Bradford R. Clark
Honoring Dan Meltzer, Bradford R. Clark
Notre Dame Law Review
Dan Meltzer was a giant in the field of Federal Courts, and it is hard to overstate his influence on its development. He taught Federal Courts at Harvard Law School and was a long-time co-author of Hart & Wechsler’s The Federal Courts and the Federal System (“Hart & Wechsler ”), the casebook that created the field and shaped how generations of judges, lawyers, and scholars think about complex questions of federal jurisdiction. In addition, Dan enriched the field immeasurably by writing seminal articles on a wide range of Federal Courts topics. His work was characterized by deep knowledge of the …
A History Of The Missouri Court Of Appeals: The Role Of Regional Conflicts In Shaping Intermediate Appellate Court Structure, Jamie Pamela Rasmussen
A History Of The Missouri Court Of Appeals: The Role Of Regional Conflicts In Shaping Intermediate Appellate Court Structure, Jamie Pamela Rasmussen
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
No abstract provided.
Attracting Undue Scrutiny On Appeal: An Appellate Judge's Perspective, Marshall L. Davidson Iii
Attracting Undue Scrutiny On Appeal: An Appellate Judge's Perspective, Marshall L. Davidson Iii
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
No abstract provided.
Infrequently Asked Questions, Edward T. Swaine
Infrequently Asked Questions, Edward T. Swaine
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
If appellate advocates could hear from courts about topics that might be raised during oral argument—as opposed to relying solely on their ability to anticipate the issues—might their answers be better? That seems likely, but it is unlikely that research could confirm that, as judicial practice overwhelmingly favors impromptu questioning. Spontaneity may be harmless if the question was predictable, or unavoidable if a judge just thought of the question. But sometimes advocates have to answer challenging questions concerning the law, facts, or implications of a position—questions that help decide the case, either due to the quality of the answer or …
Weapons Of The Weak: The Prosecutor Of The Icc's Power To Engage The Un Security Council, C. Cora True-Frost
Weapons Of The Weak: The Prosecutor Of The Icc's Power To Engage The Un Security Council, C. Cora True-Frost
Florida State University Law Review
No abstract provided.
On Viewing The Courts As Junior Partners Of Congress In Statutory Interpretation Cases: An Essay Celebrating The Scholarship Of Daniel J. Meltzer, Richard H. Fallon Jr
On Viewing The Courts As Junior Partners Of Congress In Statutory Interpretation Cases: An Essay Celebrating The Scholarship Of Daniel J. Meltzer, Richard H. Fallon Jr
Notre Dame Law Review
In this Essay, written in tribute to Dan Meltzer, I shall attempt to explicate his views regarding statutory interpretation in general, thematic terms. In doing so, I shall register my agreement with virtually all of Dan’s conclusions and frequently echo his practically minded arguments in support of them. But I shall also advance arguments—with which I cannot be entirely sure he would have agreed—that seek to show that his position reflected theoretical insights about how language works, not only in law, but also more generally in life. By seeking simultaneously to defend Dan’s views and to build on them, this …
Honoring Dan Meltzer—Congressional Standing And The Institutional Framework Of Article Iii: A Comparative Perspective, Vickie C. Jackson
Honoring Dan Meltzer—Congressional Standing And The Institutional Framework Of Article Iii: A Comparative Perspective, Vickie C. Jackson
Notre Dame Law Review
In this short Essay, I focus on only one aspect of the broader question of government standing to sue: congressional standing. For one thing, separation of powers problems are more acutely presented in federal level disputes.
Given an increased interest by parts of the Congress, especially the House of Representatives, in seeking to intervene in ongoing litigation, there are pressing new issues in the lower federal courts: U.S. District Court Judge Rosemary Collyer recently upheld congressional standing to challenge an asserted violation of the Appropriations Clause in connection with spending under the Affordable Care Act, while rejecting the House’s standing …
Introduction: Constraint, Authority, And The Rule Of Law In A Federal Circuit Court Of Appeals, John Fabian Witt
Introduction: Constraint, Authority, And The Rule Of Law In A Federal Circuit Court Of Appeals, John Fabian Witt
Fordham Law Review
Congress’ Evarts Act, signed into law in 1891, created a new Article III federal court designed almost exclusively to sit as an intermediate appellate court in between the federal trial courts and the U.S. Supreme Court. Congress created the new Evarts Act appellate courts to relieve pressure on the Supreme Court’s growing workload and to create a less arbitrary system of appeals for litigants in the federal trial courts. These twin goals of reducing the Supreme Court’s workload and establishing a meaningful right of appeal produced a set of circuit courts of appeals with a distinctively constrained new role. This, …
Introduction From The Editors Of Volume 84, Hopi Costello, Matthew Geyer, Brandon Ruben
Introduction From The Editors Of Volume 84, Hopi Costello, Matthew Geyer, Brandon Ruben
Fordham Law Review
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has always held special significance for the Fordham Law Review’s student members. Ennobled by the examples of Fordham Law School and Fordham Law Review alumni Judge Irving Kaufman, Judge William Mulligan, Judge Joseph McLaughlin, and, most recently, Judge Denny Chin, the student members of the Fordham Law Review strive to impact our profession at its highest levels. It is thus with great pleasure and pride that four current students on the Fordham Law Review join this intellectual lineage by contributing the notes written for this commemorative issue, eaching tackles recent …
Superfund Chaos Theory: What Happens When The Lower Federal Courts Don't Follow The Supreme Court, Steven Ferrey
Superfund Chaos Theory: What Happens When The Lower Federal Courts Don't Follow The Supreme Court, Steven Ferrey
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
There is legal chaos in the national Superfund. The Supreme Court reversed decisions of eleven federal circuit courts in United States v. Atlantic Research Corp. There is no instance in modern Supreme Court history where the Court reversed every federal circuit court in the country, as it did in Atlantic Research. The Supreme Court’s reversal was through a unanimous decision. This was extraordinary: It not only reversed the entire legal interpretation of one of America’s most critical statutes, but also re-allocated billions of dollars among private parties.
The Supreme Court, when it rendered its decision, seemed to be rectifying a …
A Cause Of Action, Anyone?: Federal Equity And The Preemption Of State Lalw, Henry Paul Monaghan
A Cause Of Action, Anyone?: Federal Equity And The Preemption Of State Lalw, Henry Paul Monaghan
Notre Dame Law Review
In this very brief Essay, I focus on aspects of a topic on which both Danny and I have written and on which our reasoning differed: federal court authority, “sitting in equity,” to enjoin enforcement of state law on federal preemption grounds. In a coercive action brought by the state to enforce the state law, the federal act could of course be set up as a defense. Suppose, however, that alleging “arising under” subject-matter jurisdiction, the plaintiff sues the appropriate state officials to restrain enforcement of the state statute. Many such challenges are readily entertained on the merits, often because …
Appellate Deference In The Age Of Facts, Kenji Yoshino
Appellate Deference In The Age Of Facts, Kenji Yoshino
William & Mary Law Review
This Article explores the question of how much appellate deference is due to “legislative” facts, or broad social facts about the world, established by the district courts. While it is axiomatic that “adjudicative” facts—which are the “whodunit” facts specific to a case—receive clear error deference on appeal, the Supreme Court has yet to address the degree of deference due to legislative facts. While the dominant view among appellate courts is that legislative facts should only receive de novo review, the practice of the courts has in actuality been much more fitful and inconsistent. The standard may be unsettled in part …