Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

Legal Barriers To Tribal Jurisdiction Over Violence Against Women In Maine: Developments And Paths Forward, Nina J. Ciffolillo Jul 2021

Legal Barriers To Tribal Jurisdiction Over Violence Against Women In Maine: Developments And Paths Forward, Nina J. Ciffolillo

Maine Law Review

After claiming title to the land now widely known as the United States, colonizers and settlers imposed a legal system that denies Indigenous nations agency. The United States government has launched a steady attack on attributes of Tribal sovereignty since its inception. The sexism entangled with colonialism encourages violence against women, and limitations on Tribal jurisdiction leave Indigenous nations without adequate recourse for violence against women on their land. Violence against women has become an epidemic in Indian Country, and most aggressors come from outside the territory. In 2013 when Congress granted tribes limited criminal jurisdiction over nonmembers on Tribal …


Jural Entities, Real Parties In Controversy, And Representative Litigants: A Unified Approach To The Diversity Jurisdiction Requirements For Business Organizations, Charles A. Szypszak Apr 2020

Jural Entities, Real Parties In Controversy, And Representative Litigants: A Unified Approach To The Diversity Jurisdiction Requirements For Business Organizations, Charles A. Szypszak

Maine Law Review

The rules that make the federal courts available for the resolution of controversies between citizens of different states have often been described as placing an undue burden on the federal system. Congress has for the most part turned a deaf ear to calls by jurists and commentators for reform or even abolition of federal diversity jurisdiction, leaving the courts to struggle with difficult issues about the proper contours of the jurisdictional requirements. One recurring difficult issue is the manner in which citizenship is to be attributed to the investors who compose various business organizations. The general rule has been that …


Jural Entities, Real Parties In Controversy, And Representative Litigants: A Unified Approach To The Diversity Jurisdiction Requirements For Business Organizations, Charles A. Szypszak Apr 2020

Jural Entities, Real Parties In Controversy, And Representative Litigants: A Unified Approach To The Diversity Jurisdiction Requirements For Business Organizations, Charles A. Szypszak

Maine Law Review

The rules that make the federal courts available for the resolution of controversies between citizens of different states have often been described as placing an undue burden on the federal system. Congress has for the most part turned a deaf ear to calls by jurists and commentators for reform or even abolition of federal diversity jurisdiction, leaving the courts to struggle with difficult issues about the proper contours of the jurisdictional requirements. One recurring difficult issue is the manner in which citizenship is to be attributed to the investors who compose various business organizations. The general rule has been that …


The Limited Power Of Federal Bankruptcy Courts To Stay Enforcement Of State Environmental Regulations, David A. Brenningmeyer Apr 2020

The Limited Power Of Federal Bankruptcy Courts To Stay Enforcement Of State Environmental Regulations, David A. Brenningmeyer

Maine Law Review

Over the course of the past few decades, public awareness of privately created environmental hazards has risen. As a result, state and federal legislatures have been moved to enact comprehensive environmental laws that serve both to remedy past harms and to prevent future ones. Today, environmental statutes seek to correct and prevent public health hazards as diverse as groundwater contamination, toxic waste disposal, soil contamination, destruction of native plant and animal habitats, and air pollution, to name but a few. In addition, state and federal courts have permitted the invocation of common law theories, such as nuisance and trespass, to …


Some Limits On The Judicial Power To Restrict Dissemination Of Discovery, Thomas C. Bradley Apr 2020

Some Limits On The Judicial Power To Restrict Dissemination Of Discovery, Thomas C. Bradley

Maine Law Review

The pretrial process of discovery governed by Federal and Maine Rule of Civil Procedure 26 enables plaintiffs in product liability actions to delve where few people have delved before—into a corporation's internal memoranda, competitive practices, and secret product or design information as well as other less sensitive information in a company's possession. Discovery, in this context as in others, is a powerful tool determined by the courts to be necessary for the just litigation of claims. As a balance to the leeway given parties to compel production of information in discovery, federal and Maine courts have the authority under Federal …


Discretionary Gatekeeping: The Us Supreme Court's Management Of Its Original Jurisdiction Docket Since 1961, Vincent L. Mckusick May 2018

Discretionary Gatekeeping: The Us Supreme Court's Management Of Its Original Jurisdiction Docket Since 1961, Vincent L. Mckusick

Maine Law Review

There is a special drama when a state sues another state invoking the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States. In the international arena, similar disputes between sovereign states would be settled through diplomatic negotiations or armed conflict, and the stakes in the Supreme Court trial are often as high as in international disputes. The same special drama attends a trial in the Supreme Court with the United States opposing one or more of the fifty States. In drafting Article III of the Constitution the Founders treated the states as quasi-sovereigns and, to match the dignity of …


Personal Jurisdiction And The Web, Joseph S. Burns, Richard A. Bales Feb 2018

Personal Jurisdiction And The Web, Joseph S. Burns, Richard A. Bales

Maine Law Review

Courts have struggled in determining precisely when a defendant should be subject to suit in a particular forum based on his or her Web activity. Although most jurisdictions have applied some form of the “minimum contacts” test, the test has been applied inconsistently. A new standard is needed to resolve personal jurisdiction disputes arising out of Web activity. This Article examines the ways in which modern courts have attempted to resolve personal jurisdiction issues based on Web activity, as well as the inconsistencies that have resulted from the inherent difficulty in conceptualizing the Web.