Law Commons^™

The High Price Of Poverty: A Study Of How The Majority Of Current Court System Procedures For Collecting Court Costs And Fees, As Well As Fines, Have Failed To Adhere To Established Precedent And The Constitutional Guarantees They Advocate., Trevor J. Calligan

Trevor J Calligan

No abstract provided.

Should The State Pay The Fees Of Claimant Representatives In Unemployment Insurance Hearings?, Paul Wyler

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Slides: Dam Building And Removal On The Elwha: A Prototype Of Adaptive Mismanagement And A Tribal Opportunity, William H. Rodgers, Jr.

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

Presenter: William H. Rodgers, Jr., Stimson Bullitt Professor of Environmental Law, University of Washington School of Law

77 slides

Blame It On The Bee Gees: The Attack On Trial Lawyers And Civil Justice, Robert S. Peck, John Vail

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

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

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 …