Law Commons^™

A Toothless Tcpa: An Analysis Of Article Iii Standing, Personal Jurisdiction, And The Disjuncture Problem’S Impact On The Efficacy Of The Telephone Consumer Protection Act, Sebastian W. Johnson

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Heuristic Approach To Solving Complex Litigation Problems, Melanie L. Oxhorn

University of Cincinnati Law Review

This Article’s purpose is to propose a heuristic for effectively resolving complex litigation problems that are not clearly or concisely defined, do not present any immediate solutions, frequently involve novel situations or applications of legal doctrine, and suggest a var­­­­iety of possible approaches. The features of this heuristic are derived from and compatible with what we know about good scientific theories and cognitive studies on acquiring knowledge and expertise in any area. As proposed herein, students and less experienced practitioners should focus on developing “critical thinking” skills allowing them to use their training and experience to become adept at identifying …

Divide, "Two-Step," And Conquer: How Johnson & Johnson Spurred The Bankruptcy System, Patrick Maney

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Underage And Unprotected: Federal Grand Juries, Child Development, And The Systemic Failure To Protect Minors Subpoenaed As Witnesses, Lucy Litt

University of Cincinnati Law Review

Grand juries in the United States were originally intended to protect people from unwarranted criminal prosecution by the government; however, criticism of federal grand juries in the U.S. throughout the past five decades demonstrates that these deliberative bodies protect prosecutors at the expense of the people subjected to their investigations. Worse still, federal grand jury proceedings circumvent fundamental constitutional rights, direct judicial oversight, and many of the procedural protections of criminal trials; they enable prosecutors to strip unaccused individuals subpoenaed solely for witness testimony of their safety, rights, and liberty. Prosecutorial misconduct has received increasingly widespread attention, especially in recent …

A Framework For Assessing Whether Civil Penalties Under The False Claims Act Violate The Excessive Fines Clause Of The Eighth Amendment, Joel D. Hesch

University of Cincinnati Law Review

Fraud is crippling government programs, such as Medicare and the military. The government’s primary enforcement tool is the False Claims Act (“FCA”), which not only requires that the defendant pay three times the amount of damages, but also mandates a civil penalty of not less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000 (with adjustments for inflation) per violation. Because civil penalties apply to each false claim, complex fraud schemes may result in a defendant being liable for hundreds or even thousands of civil penalties. This article analyzes when civil penalties (or a portion of treble damages) under the FCA violate …

A Tipping Point In Ohio: The Primacy Model As A Path To A Consistent Application Of Judicial Federalism, The Honorable Pierre Bergeron

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Best Of Both Worlds: Reconciling Tradition With Evolution Under The Ohio And Federal Right To A Civil Jury Trial, Jacob Hoback

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Way Lawyers Worked, Michael Risch, Mike Viney

University of Cincinnati Law Review

Court and litigation operations are opaque in the best of times, and the lack of explanatory Nineteenth Century legal records makes it even more difficult to learn how lawyers and judges went about their business. This may be one of the reasons there are so few accounts detailing the nuts and bolts of 1800s law practice. This Article illuminates the development of litigation and the law in the middle of the Nineteenth Century by examining archival court and Patent Office records.

Most accounts of the time focus either on judicial opinions or the relationship of the parties, but few articles …

Do Seven Members Of Congress Have Article Iii Standing To Sue The Executive Branch?: Why The D.C. Circuit’S Divided Decision In Maloney V. Murphy Was Wrongly Decided In Light Of Two Prior District Court Decisions And Historical Separation Of Powers Jurisprudence, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

The D.C. Circuit’s divided decision in Maloney v. Murphy granting standing to minority party members of the House Oversight Committee appears questionable in light of two prior district court decisions in Waxman and Cummings that had denied standing in similar circumstances. Most importantly, Maloney is inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent regarding standing for individual members of Congress. In Raines v. Byrd, the Supreme Court held that individual members of Congress generally do not have standing to enforce institutional congressional interests such as whether a statute is constitutional, but that one or both Houses of Congress must sue as an institution. …

One Vote, Two Votes, Three Votes, Four: How Ranked Choice Voting Burdens Voting Rights And More, Brandon Bryer

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Immunity Confusion: Why Are Ohio Courts Unable To Apply A Clear Immunity Standard In School-Bullying Cases?, Liam Mcmillin

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Parity As Comparative Capacity: A New Empirics Of The Parity Debate, Meredith R. Aska Mcbride

University of Cincinnati Law Review

In 1977, Burt Neuborne published an article in the Harvard Law Review proclaiming that parity was a “myth”—that state courts could not be trusted to enforce federal constitutional rights. For the next 15 years, the question of parity (the equivalence of state and federal courts in adjudicating federal causes of action) was at the forefront of federal courts scholarship. But in the early 1990s, the parity debate ground to a halt after important commentators proclaimed it an empirical question that, paradoxically, could not be answered by any existing empirical methods. This article argues that proposition was unfounded at the time …

Lawyers On Auction - Protecting Class Members, Ittai Paldor

University of Cincinnati Law Review

The inadequacy of class settlements plagues mass litigation. Virtually all class actions settle, but a plethora of case law and academic writings shows that class attorneys often walk away from these settlements with a hefty fee, while class members receive illusory benefits. Class counsel may intentionally sell out class members by agreeing to a suboptimal settlement in return for increased fees. Class counsel may also genuinely miscalculate the best attainable settlement. In both cases, the mechanisms currently in place to protect class members—mainly court oversight—fail miserably.

This Article develops a simple solution: once a settlement is reached, appointment as class …

Who Carries The Burden Of Proving Causation In An Erisa Section 409(A) Suit For Breach Of Fiduciary Duty?, Edward Rivin

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fakers And Floodgates, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

There has always been the possibility of judicial skepticism about employment discrimination claims. Recently, the Supreme Court made this skepticism explicit. In University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, the Supreme Court expressed concern about fake claims and floodgates of litigation. It then used these arguments to tip the substantive law against retaliation claims. This article responds to this explicit skepticism about discrimination claims. First, it shows that the Court created reasons to limit retaliation claims that are not tied to congressional intent. Second, the factual claims that the Court makes are not grounded in evidence, and available information …

Overcoming The Obstacles Of Garrett: An As Applied Saving Construction For The Ada's Title Ii, S. Elizabeth Malloy, Timothy J. Cahill

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

Recent Supreme Court cases regarding Congress's abrogation authority have seriously impaired Congress's ability to demonstrate a valid exercise of its Section 5 power under the Fourteenth Amendment to subject nonconsenting states to suit for money damages in federal court. During its 2003 term, the Supreme Court has again granted certiorari to a case involving the proper scope of Congress's section 5 power, Lane v. Tennessee. Lane involves a suit for money damages under Title II of the ADA based on the alleged failure of the State of Tennessee to make its courthouses accessible. Many commentators suggest that the Supreme Court …

Using Decision Trees As Tools For Settlement, Marjorie Corman Aaron

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

While experienced lawyers can some­ times develop an intuitive sense of what a case is worth, their intuition may not be sufficient in a case of considerable complexity. Furthermore, intuitive "gut sense" valuations are hard to support or explain to clients.

Decision trees allow the parties and their lawyers to see more clearly how the strengths and weaknesses of their positions on specific issues will affect the overall value of a case. Long popular in the business community, deci­sion analysis has evolved as a tool for lawyers to help make decisions in complex litigation.