Law Commons^™

A Step Toward Robust Criminal Discovery Reform In Virginia: The Disclosure Of Witness Statements Before Trial, Jennifer Horan

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Civil Practice And Procedure, Christopher S. Dadak

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law And Procedure, Aaron J. Campbell

University of Richmond Law Review

This article aims to give a succinct review of notable criminal

law and procedure cases decided by the Supreme Court of Virginia

and the Court of Appeals of Virginia during the past year. Instead

of covering every ruling or rationale in these cases, the article

focuses on the "take-away" of the holdings with the most

precedential value. The article also summarizes noteworthy

changes to criminal law and procedure enacted by the 2017 Virginia

General Assembly.

When Is It Necessary For Corporations To Be Essentially At Home?: An Exploration Of Exceptional Cases, Priscilla Heinz

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Highest Court: A Dialogue Between Justice Louis Brandeis And Justice Antonin Scalia On Stare Decisis, P. Thomas Distanislao Iii

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Enhancing Cybersecurity In The Private Sector By Means Of Civil Liability Lawsuits - The Connie Francis Effect, Jeffrey F. Addicott

University of Richmond Law Review

The purpose of this article is to explore the threats posed by

cybersecurity breaches, outline the steps taken by the government

to address those threats in the private sector economy, and

call attention to the ultimate solution, which will most certainly

spur private businesses to create a more secure cyber environment

for the American people-a Connie Francis-styled cyber civil

action lawsuit.

Preventing An Air Panopticon: A Proposal For Reasonable Legal Restrictions On Aerial Surveillance, Jake Laperruque

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Acknowledgments, Alexander R. Mcdaniel

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Equal Protection Component Of Legislative Generality, Evan C. Zoldan

University of Richmond Law Review

This article advances the broad project outlined above by recognizing

the equal protection component of legislative generality.

Exploring the relationship between the Equal Protection Clause

and the value of legislative generality both enhances an understanding

of the proper bounds of the Equal Protection Clause and

helps define the ultimate parameters of a value of legislative generality.

Part I of this article defines and provides paradigmatic

examples of special legislation. Part II identifies the most widely

held conceptions of equality that can be enforced through the

Equal Protection Clause and describes how special legislation offends

these conceptions. Part III describes how …

Dizzying Gillespie: The Exaggerated Death Of The Balancing Approach And The Inescapable Allure Of Flexibility In Appellate Jurisdiction, Bryan Lammon

University of Richmond Law Review

In Part I, I provide necessary background on the current re- gime of federal appellate jurisdiction before turning to the rise and fall of Gillespie and the balancing approach. Part I concludes by explaining how inconsistent Gillespie and the balancing approach are with the Supreme Court's current approach to appellate jurisdiction. Part II turns to five areas in which the balancing approach persists in the courts of appeals and demonstrates the influence of the balancing approach, and the often case-by-case nature of decision-making, in each of these areas. And in Part III, I explore the implications of the balancing approach's …

Indecency Four Years After Fox Television Stations: From Big Papi To A Porn Star, An Egregious Mess At The Fcc Continues, Clay Calvert, Minch Minchin, Keran Billaud, Kevin Bruckenstein, Tershone Phillips

University of Richmond Law Review

Using the WDBJ case as an analytical springboard, this article examines the tumultuous state of the FCC's indecency enforcement regime more than three years after the Supreme Court's June 2012 opinion in Fox Television Stations. Part I of this article briefly explores the missed First Amendment opportunities in Fox Television Stations, as well as some possible reasons why the Supreme Court chose to avoid the free-speech questions in that case." Part II addresses the FCC's decision in September 2012 to target only egregious instances of broadcast indecency and, in the process, to jettison hundreds of thousands of complaints that had …