Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Voting Rights Act And The "New And Improved" Intent Test: Old Wine In New Bottles, Randolph M. Scott-Mclaughlin
The Voting Rights Act And The "New And Improved" Intent Test: Old Wine In New Bottles, Randolph M. Scott-Mclaughlin
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Part Ii, John Williams
Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Part Ii, John Williams
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Fred Brewington
Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Fred Brewington
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Criminal Prosecution And Section 1983, Barry C. Scheck
Criminal Prosecution And Section 1983, Barry C. Scheck
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Section 1983 Custom Claims And The Code Of Silence, Myriam Gilles
Section 1983 Custom Claims And The Code Of Silence, Myriam Gilles
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
What Remains Of Vicarious Jurisdiction For Establishing General Jurisdiction Over Corporate Defendants After Daimler Ag V. Bauman?, Keri Martin
Seton Hall Circuit Review
No abstract provided.
“Spooky Action At A Distance”: Intangible Injury In Fact In The Information Age, Seth F. Kreimer
“Spooky Action At A Distance”: Intangible Injury In Fact In The Information Age, Seth F. Kreimer
All Faculty Scholarship
Two decades after Justice Douglas coined “injury in fact” as the token of admission to federal court under Article III, Justice Scalia sealed it into the constitutional canon in Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife. In the two decades since Lujan, Justice Scalia has thrown increasingly pointed barbs at the permissive standing doctrine of the Warren Court, maintaining it is founded on impermissible recognition of “Psychic Injury.” Justice Scalia and his acolytes take the position that Article III requires a tough minded, common sense and practical approach. Injuries in fact must be "tangible" "direct" "concrete" "de facto" realities in time and …
Neutralizing The Stratagem Of “Snap Removal”: A Proposed Amendment To The Judicial Code, Arthur Hellman, Lonny Hoffman, Thomas D. Rowe Jr., Joan Steinman, Georgene Vairo
Neutralizing The Stratagem Of “Snap Removal”: A Proposed Amendment To The Judicial Code, Arthur Hellman, Lonny Hoffman, Thomas D. Rowe Jr., Joan Steinman, Georgene Vairo
Faculty Scholarship
The “Removal Jurisdiction Clarification Act” is a narrowly tailored legislative proposal designed to resolve a widespread conflict in the federal district courts over the proper interpretation of the statutory “forum-defendant” rule.
The forum-defendant rule prohibits removal of a diversity case “if any of the parties in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the [forum state].” 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2) (emphasis added). Some courts, following the “plain language” of the statute, hold that defendants can avoid the constraints of the rule by removing diversity cases to federal court when a citizen of the forum state has …
Paterno V. Laser Spine Institute: Did The New York Court Of Appeals' Misapplication Of Unjustified Policy Fears Lead To A Miscarriage Of Justice And The Creation Of Inadequate Precedent For The Proper Use Of The Empire State’S Long-Arm Statute?, Jay C. Carlisle, Christine M. Murphy, Kiersten M. Schramek, Marley Strauss
Paterno V. Laser Spine Institute: Did The New York Court Of Appeals' Misapplication Of Unjustified Policy Fears Lead To A Miscarriage Of Justice And The Creation Of Inadequate Precedent For The Proper Use Of The Empire State’S Long-Arm Statute?, Jay C. Carlisle, Christine M. Murphy, Kiersten M. Schramek, Marley Strauss
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This article discusses CPLR section 302(a)(1) as applied by the New York State Court of Appeals in Paterno v. Laser Spine Institute. The Paterno Court failed to properly apply a statutory jurisdictional analysis by conflating it with a due process inquiry. Also, the Court unnecessarily balanced the interests of the Empire State's citizens in having a forum for access to justice with unjustified policy fears of potential costs to the state from assertions of in personam jurisdiction. Furthermore, the Court's policy focus4 on the protection of medical doctors from lawsuits and the prevention of “floodgate” litigation which would adversely affect …
A 21st Century Approach To Personal Jurisdiction, Robert E. Pfeffer
A 21st Century Approach To Personal Jurisdiction, Robert E. Pfeffer
The University of New Hampshire Law Review
[Excerpt] "Personal jurisdiction doctrine plays a major role in many civil disputes in the United States. When the defendant resides in, is incorporated or headquartered in (in the case of a corporation or other business), or is otherwise found in the particular state where suit is brought, personal jurisdiction generally is found to exist and is unproblematic. Major personal jurisdiction issues usually arise when a plaintiff sues the defendant in a state other than the one in which the defendant is located.
In many cases involving parties located in different states, where a suit takes place is as extensively litigated …