Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Preview—Asarco Llc V. Atlantic Richfield Company: Allocation Of Remediation Costs Under Cercla, Nyles G. Greer
Preview—Asarco Llc V. Atlantic Richfield Company: Allocation Of Remediation Costs Under Cercla, Nyles G. Greer
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals originally scheduled oral arguments in this matter for Tuesday, March 31, 2020, at 9:00 a.m. in the William K. Nakamura Courthouse in Seattle, Washington. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Ninth Circuit has postponed oral arguments in this matter. While still subject to change due to the pandemic, the court has rescheduled oral arguments for April 27, 2020, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 2 of the William K. Nakamura Courthouse in Seattle, Washington. Shannon Wells Stevenson will likely appear on behalf of the Appellant. Gregory Evans will likely appear on behalf of the Appellee.
The Meaning Of Green Growth, Michael A. Livermore
The Meaning Of Green Growth, Michael A. Livermore
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
Although the term is still rarely used in the United States, in recent years “green growth” has become part of the lexicon of global environmental policy. Unfortunately, although it is frequently cited as a public policy goal, green growth has remained vague and ill-defined, leading to conflicting interpretations and confusion over the distinction between green growth and related concepts like sustainable development. This paper seeks to clarify the meaning of green growth as a distinct concept, defining a “green growth frontier” of policies that dominate along both environmental and economic dimensions. The green growth agenda can be understood as moving …
Rational Electricity Regulation: Environmental Impacts And The "Public Interest", Jeremy Knee
Rational Electricity Regulation: Environmental Impacts And The "Public Interest", Jeremy Knee
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
Now, Later, Or Never: Applying Asymmetric Discount Rates In Nuisance Remedies And Federal Regulations, Yang Wang
Michigan Law Review
Part I of this Note reviews recent literature on the need for asymmetric discount rates in cost-benefit analysis. It observes that even though scholars disagree on the precise value of the appropriate discount rate, many agree that future costs and benefits must be discounted at different rates. Part II then constructs a simple model, consisting of two activities competing for the same resource, and analyzes the consequences of asymmetric discounting under this model. This Part proposes that, to maximize the joint social utility, the resource should be time divided between the competing activities rather than permanently allocated to one or …
Questionable Summary Judgments, Appearances Of Judicial Bias, And Insurance Defense In Texas Declaratory-Judgment Trials: A Proposal And Arguments For Revising Texas Rules Of Civil Procedure 166a(A), 166a(B), And 166a(L)., Willy E. Rice
St. Mary's Law Journal
Economic necessity, expanding dockets, and judicial bias and unfairness are reasons for removing summary judgement practice from declaratory judgment trials in Texas. The Texas Supreme Court adopted the summary judgment rule primarily to prevent juries from considering arguably groundless causes, to reduce costs, and to increase "the efficient administration of justice." The Texas Supreme Court could prevent summary judgment practice in declaratory judgment cases. Texas's judges have the power to decide questions of fact and law when considering whether to award declaratory relief, negating the perceived need to entertain motions for summary relief. Trial judges must employ those doctrines to …
Interference With Prospective Civil Litigation By Spollation Of Evidence: Should Texas Adopt A New Tort., Philip A. Lionberger
Interference With Prospective Civil Litigation By Spollation Of Evidence: Should Texas Adopt A New Tort., Philip A. Lionberger
St. Mary's Law Journal
Texas courts should adopt a tort for spoliation of evidence. Spoliation of evidence is the tampering with, interference with, loss of, or destruction of evidence. Spoliation of evidence is a serious legal problem because it increases a litigant’s difficulty in proving a cause of action or a defense. Evidence destruction may also increase litigation costs and cause the trial court to make factfinding errors. Texas courts should adopt the tort of spoliation of evidence because it compensates injured litigants and deters future acts of spoliation. Another reason for adopting the tort for spoliation of evidence is the inadequacy of alternative …