Law Commons^™

Personal Jurisdiction Over Aliens In Patent Infringement Actions: A Uniform Approach Toward The Situs Of The Tort, David Wille

Michigan Law Review

This Note examines current approaches to the question of personal jurisdiction over alien patent infringers. Part I describes personal jurisdiction requirements in the context of patent infringement suits against aliens. The leading case addressing these requirements has been interpreted differently by several courts, thus resulting in conflicting outcomes. Part II explains the current controversy over the locus of the tort of patent infringement. The three different modes of reasoning currently used by courts to determine the locus of the tort would allow immunity from suit for the alien in at least two hypothetical cases. This Part concludes that in order …

The Prescriptive Jurisdictional Reach Of U.S. Antitrust Law: Judge Learned Hand's Requirement Of A "Substantive Anticompetitive Effect", Michael F. Kelley

University of Miami Inter-American Law Review

No abstract provided.

Compounding Or Creating Confusion About Supplemental Jurisdiction? A Reply To Professor Freer, Thomas D. Rowe Jr., Stephen B. Burbank, Thomas M. Mengler

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

On The Need For A Uniform Choice Of Law Code, Larry Kramer

Michigan Law Review

At first blush, the notion of a uniform choice of law code seems almost paradoxical. After all, the primary mission of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) is to promote uniformity in the law, while choice of law exists only because laws are not uniform. To be sure, the Constitution of the NCCUSL limits the organization's objective to promoting uniformity "where uniformity is desirable and practicable," which leaves plenty of room for different laws and hence for choice of law. But even so, one would expect the Commissioners to devote their limited resources to reducing the …

Behind The Parity Debate: The Decline Of The Legal Process Tradition In The Law Of Federal Courts, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

Whether there is parity between federal and state courts has become a central question in the law of federal courts, dividing judges and commentators into two well-defined camps. Although the issue rarely arose thirty years ago, it now enters into virtually every discussion of the rules concerning access to federal court for constitutional claims. On one side of the debate, advocates of broad federal jurisdiction over constitutional challenges to state action claim that federal courts are better than state courts at adjudicating these controversies. On the other side, advocates of state court jurisdiction insist that state courts are fully adequate …

Is 28 U.S.C. § 1404(A) A Federal Forum-Shopping Statute?, Michaael B. Rodden

Washington Law Review

In 1948, Congress enacted section 1404(a) of Tit;e 28 to allow transfers between federal district courts. Congress intended the statute to promote convenience in the federal courts. The statute does not specify which state's law applies following a transfer, but in 1964, in Van Dusen v. Barrack, the Supreme Court determined that the state law of the transferor court must apply following defendant-initiated transfers. The Van Dusen Court reasoned that application of the statute should promote convenience and uniformity and discourage forum-shopping in the federal courts. In 1990, in Ferens v. John Deere Co., the Supreme Court held that the …

Pragmatism Without Politics-A Half Measure Of Authority For Jurisdictional Common Law, Gene R. Shreve

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Treatise Writing And Federal Jurisdiction Scholarship: Does Doctrine Matter When Law Is Politics?, Richard A. Matasar

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Federal Jurisdiction by Erwin Chemerinsky and Federal Jurisdiction 1990 Supplement by Erwin Chemerinsky

Plotting The Next "Revolution" In Choice Of Law: A Proposed Approach, Gary J. Simson

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

An Easy Case Makes Bad Law—Burnham V. Superior Court Of California, 110 S. Ct. 2105 (1990), Robert Taylor-Manning

Washington Law Review

In Burnham v. Superior Court of California, the United States Supreme Court considered the continued vitality of transient jurisdiction. Although the Court unanimously held that the defendant was subject to state court jurisdiction, it failed to agree on the issue of transient jurisdiction, issuing three plurality opinions. This Note examines Burnham and concludes that the Court should invalidate transient jurisdiction as a violation of due process rights. It proposes that the Court evaluate all state court assertions of jurisdiction against a minimum contacts standard.

Inconsistent Judgments, John C. Mccoid, Ii

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

One Hundred Years Of Influence On National Jurisprudence: Second Circuit Court Of Appeals Decisions Reviewed By The United States Supreme Court, Roger J. Miner '56

Endowed/named Lectures and Keynote Addresses

No abstract provided.

After Mallard V. United States: The Federal Courts' Inherent Power To Appoint Representation For Indigent Civil Litigants, Laura B. Hardwicke

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Survey Of Civil Jurisdiction In Indian Country 1990, Sandra Hansen Esq.

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

California V. Ferc: Federal Supremacy In Hydroelectric Power Continues, Jill K. Osborne

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Personal Jurisdiction And The Beetle In The Box, Wendy Collins Perdue

Law Faculty Publications

In 1980 in World-Wide Volkswagen v. Woodson, the Supreme Court described personal jurisdiction as "an instrument of interstate federalism." Two years later in Insurance Corporation of Ireland v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee, the Court back-pedaled and explained that personal jurisdiction "represents a restriction on judicial power not as a matter of sovereignty, but as a matter of individual liberty." Then, in 1985 in Phillips Petroleum v. Shutts, the Court explained that the purpose of personal jurisdiction is "to protect a defendant from the travail of defending in a distant forum." Three years later in Van Cauwenberghe v. Biard, …

Bringing Meaning To Interest Balancing In Transnational Litigation, Spencer W. Waller

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Article contends that the current state of the debate over the balancing of interests in the extraterritorial application of United States law is outmoded and in need of serious reexamination. Most commentators and scholars continue to focus on the area of jurisdiction to prescribe, the acceptability of the effects test, and the development of lists of United States and foreign interests to be balanced by a United States court before exercising jurisdiction.

Professor Waller contends that this debate is no longer productive. Extraterritoriality, with some limitations for the interests of other states, is an accepted feature of United States …

Finding Harmony Amidst Disagreement Over Extradition, Jurisdiction, The Role Of Human Rights, And Issues Of Extraterritoriality Under International Criminal Law, Christopher L. Blakesley, Otto Lagodny

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Article examines extradition and jurisdiction over extraterritorial crime, focusing on the relationship between jurisdiction and extradition in the broader context of human rights law. The authors challenge what they argue are chimerical, although strongly held beliefs in the incompatibility of European and United States criminal justice systems and extradition practices. They argue that cooperation in matters of international criminal law may be enhanced, while protection of human rights is promoted. The authors establish this possibility by breaking down the barriers to understanding that stem from the divergent European versus Anglo-American modes of analysis.

Criminal Jurisdiction Over Nonmember Indians: The Legal Void After Duro V. Reina, Douglas B. Cubberley

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

International Year In Review: Developments In International Criminal Law, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

In this piece Professor Blakesley provides remarks on recent developments in International Criminal Law.

Jurisdiction: Burnham V. Superior Court: Adding Confusion To Transient Jurisdiction, Armand Paliotta

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Finding Harmony Amidst Disagreement Over Extradition, Jurisdiction, The Role Of Human Rights, And Issues Of Extraterritoriality Under International Criminal Law, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

This Article examines extradition and jurisdiction over extraterritorial crime, focusing on the relationship between jurisdiction and extradition in the broader context of human rights law. The authors challenge what they argue are chimerical, although strongly held beliefs in the incompatibility of European and United States criminal justice systems and extradition practices. They argue that cooperation in matters of international criminal law may be enhanced, while protection of human rights is promoted. The authors establish this possibility by breaking down the barriers to understanding that stem from the divergent European versus Anglo-American modes of analysis.

The authors first analyze the five …

O'Connor: A Dual Role - An Introduction, Stephen Wermiel

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

No abstract provided.

New York State Bar Association Committee On State Constitution: Summary Of 1990 Activities

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Comptroller And Attorney-General

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Specialized Courts In Administrative Law, Harold H. Bruff

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Czechoslovak Approach To The Draft Convention On Jurisdictional Immunitites Of States And Their Property, Vladimir Balaš, Monika Pauknerová

Michigan Journal of International Law

This article deals with four issues: (1) The effort of the International Law Commission of the United Nations to codify jurisdictional immunity. (2) The theoretical and practical Czechoslovak approach toward the institution of jurisdictional immunity of States and the Draft Convention, and a prediction of possible change of the Czechoslovak view. (3) The changing views of East European scholars. (4) An analysis of particular provisions of the Draft Convention with respect to their acceptability by States with different socioeconomic systems and especially by Czechoslovakia.

Enforcement Of Foreign Money-Judgments In The United States: In Search Of Uniformity And International Acceptance, Ronald A. Brand

Articles

When international trade and investment increase, so does the need for satisfactory means of dispute resolution. Dispute resolution in national courts requires that litigants consider not only the likelihood of a favorable judgment but also the ability to collect on that judgment. In cases where the defendant’s assets lie in another jurisdiction, collection is possible only if the second jurisdiction will recognize the first jurisdiction’s judgment.

In the international arena, enforcement of United State judgments overseas is often possible only if the United States court rendering the judgment would enforce a similar decision of the foreign enforcing court. This reciprocity …

Introduction To Greek Law, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

Greek Law, developed under the stewardship of Professor Konstantinos Kerameus, takes on his character, being a solid, careful work of first rate scholarship. It presents the Greek legal system, the substance of each part of its civil public and penal law and procedure, in a series of well-written and insightful chapters by many of the best Greek scholars (in the United States and in Greece) on each subject. The book is important, because Greece is in the Common Market and Council of Europe, and because the continental and even the common law systems owe their development to the Ro- man-Byzantine …

International Law Principles Governing The Extraterritorial Application Of Criminal Law, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

In this piece Professor Blakesley provides remarks on the differences and similarities between Germany and the United States on international principles of jurisdiction over extraterritorial crime.