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

Law Commons

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

PDF

Journal

2009

Litigation

Articles 1 - 16 of 16

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Irrelevancy Of The Fourth Amendment In The Roberts Court, Thomas K. Clancy Dec 2009

The Irrelevancy Of The Fourth Amendment In The Roberts Court, Thomas K. Clancy

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Since John Roberts Jr. became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, there has been a measurable decline in the number of cases addressing Fourth Amendment questions. This article examines the reasons for that decline and predicts the substantial elimination of Fourth Amendment litigation in the Roberts Court. The prediction is based on several premises, including the lack of interest of the Justices on the Court concerning search and seizures principles and two significant recent cases, Pearson v. Callahan and United States v. Herring, which presage a significant decline in the number of lower court cases addressing the merits of …


Substantive Review In Appellate Courts Since Dunsmuir, Gerald P. Heckman Oct 2009

Substantive Review In Appellate Courts Since Dunsmuir, Gerald P. Heckman

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

In Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick, the Supreme Court re-examined its approach to judicial review of administrative decisions to develop a "more coherent and-workable" framework. It merged the deferential standards of reasonableness simpliciter and patent unreasonableness into a single reasonableness standard and emphasized the importance of precedent in determining the standard applicable to a specific category of decision makers. The author makes a preliminary assessment of Dunsmuir's impact on judicial review through an analysis of recent Canadian appellate decisions. He concludes that, white Dunsmuir simplifies the standard of review analysis by encouraging courts' reliance on satisfactory precedents and guidelines to determine …


Proceeding With (Pre)Caution: Environmental Principles As Interpretive Tools In Applications For Pre-Trial Injunctions, Heather Mcleod-Kilmurray Oct 2009

Proceeding With (Pre)Caution: Environmental Principles As Interpretive Tools In Applications For Pre-Trial Injunctions, Heather Mcleod-Kilmurray

Dalhousie Law Journal

In many cases of imminent environmental harm, a trial may take years. To prevent harm in the meantime, pre-trial injunctions are essential. The author highlights the important role of interlocutory injunctions in Canadian environmental litigation, uncovers the judicial assumptions and attitudes toward the environment which these decisions reveal, and proposes a precautionary approach to interpreting the interlocutory injunction test in environmental cases. She argues that prevailing judicial attitudes and presumptions in relation to environmental claims often negatively influence how the discretionary elements in procedural rules governing pre-trial injunctions are applied. Although there has been much analysis of principles such as …


The Proverbial Axe To The Judicial Oak: The Impact Of Stoneridge On Plaintiff's Actions Under § 10(B), Laura D. Mruk May 2009

The Proverbial Axe To The Judicial Oak: The Impact Of Stoneridge On Plaintiff's Actions Under § 10(B), Laura D. Mruk

Northern Illinois University Law Review

This article analyzes the United States Supreme Court decision of Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, in which the Court held that fraud claims under section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 cannot be sustained against third parties that did not directly mislead investors. After providing a brief overview of section 10(b) and rule l0b-5 jurisprudence, this note will discuss the facts surrounding the Stoneridge decision and provide an in-depth discussion of the majority opinion. This article ultimately advances the argument that the Stoneridge Court erred in its analysis of the plain language of the statute, previous case …


Can Effective Apology Emerge Through Litigation?, Alphonse A. Gerhardstein Apr 2009

Can Effective Apology Emerge Through Litigation?, Alphonse A. Gerhardstein

Law and Contemporary Problems

Gerhardstein provides a number of examples in which the factors identified by Roger Conner and Patricia Jordan--ripeness, a window of opportunity, and a symbolic act or gesture--came together to facilitate apology by a public leader. But he doesn't think that the window of opportunity needs to be exogenously determined. Rather, advocates can, through litigation and settlement demands, create that window. He believes that apology by public officials can do more to promote healthy civic society than can mere monetary settlement.


The King And I?: An Examination Of The Interest Qui Tam Relators Represent And The Implications For Future False Claims Act Litigation, Nathan D. Sturycz Jan 2009

The King And I?: An Examination Of The Interest Qui Tam Relators Represent And The Implications For Future False Claims Act Litigation, Nathan D. Sturycz

Saint Louis University Public Law Review

No abstract provided.


Common-Sense Construction Of Unfair Claims Settlement Statutes: Restoring The Good Faith In Bad Faith, Victor Schwartz, Christopher E. Appel Jan 2009

Common-Sense Construction Of Unfair Claims Settlement Statutes: Restoring The Good Faith In Bad Faith, Victor Schwartz, Christopher E. Appel

American University Law Review

This Article proposes to balance the scale by providing principles for the reasonable construction of bad-faith and unfair claims settlement practices in statutes applicable to insurance. Part I examines the history and development of bad-faith law, and discusses the common structure of statutes giving rise to badfaith settlement claims. Part II presents general principles courts may apply to resolve an action alleging bad faith, and specific principles courts may apply to address common issues with many states’ statutes. Part III then evaluates the public policy involved in applying such principles to first-party claims where the insured suffers an injury and …


In The Wake Of Ledbetter V. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company: Applying The Discovery Rule To Determine The Start Of The Limitations Period For Pay Discrimination Claims, Nancy Zisk Jan 2009

In The Wake Of Ledbetter V. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company: Applying The Discovery Rule To Determine The Start Of The Limitations Period For Pay Discrimination Claims, Nancy Zisk

Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy

"14 These laws include Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,15 Section 1981 of the Civil War Reconstruction statutes,16 the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA),17 the Equal Pay Act (EPA),18 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).19 While the statutes define different types of discrimination, each addresses discrimination in employment and defines a limitations period in which an employee can bring a claim.20 With Title VII defining the "paradigm," the first step in determining whether a claim is timely under any statute is determining when the discriminatory act takes place.21 To do that, …


Trials And Tribulations: What Happens When Historians Enter The Courtroom, David Rosner Jan 2009

Trials And Tribulations: What Happens When Historians Enter The Courtroom, David Rosner

Law and Contemporary Problems

In recent years, historians have been brought into legal cases in unprecedented numbers. As the courts have tried to adjudicate responsibility for environmental and occupational diseases, history has played an increasingly central role in decisions that affect the cases themselves and in social policy regarding risk. In suits over tobacco-related diseases, asbestosis, radiation, and other toxic substances, more historians of technology and science, social history, and public health are being sought to provide testimony aimed at assessing responsibility for damages that have arisen years--sometimes decades--after exposure. Here, Rosner traces the use of historians as experts in litigation.


Proving Preemption By Proving Exemption: The Quandary Of The National Securities Market Improvement Act, Jeffrey D. Chadwick Jan 2009

Proving Preemption By Proving Exemption: The Quandary Of The National Securities Market Improvement Act, Jeffrey D. Chadwick

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


On What It Means To Be A Lawyer Of Faith, Leon Holmes Jan 2009

On What It Means To Be A Lawyer Of Faith, Leon Holmes

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.


Procedural And Judicial Limitations On Voir Dire - Constitutional Implications And Preservation Of Error In Civil Cases., R. Brent Cooper, Diana L. Faust Jan 2009

Procedural And Judicial Limitations On Voir Dire - Constitutional Implications And Preservation Of Error In Civil Cases., R. Brent Cooper, Diana L. Faust

St. Mary's Law Journal

The right to a trial by jury is meaningless without an effective voir dire. Recurring tort reform, rapid technological advancements, immediate access to media coverage of incidents that give rise to litigation have greatly expanded. Consequentially, courts are faced with the prospect that potential jurors’ opinions and attitudes have been tainted. In addition to these issues, trial courts display significant interest in promptly expediting the advancement of their dockets. Voir dire is an essential element of trial strategy. Voir dire allows counsel to establish rapport with potential jurors, introduce them to the issues and facts of the case, and identify …


Science, Law And The Expert Witness, Joseph Sanders Jan 2009

Science, Law And The Expert Witness, Joseph Sanders

Law and Contemporary Problems

Expert witnessing is a particularly useful place to observe the clash of legal and scientific conventions because it is here that one group of people (scientific experts) who are integrated into one set of conventions are challenged by the expectations of a different set of conventions. Here, Sanders looks at how legal conventions affect the behavior of expert witnesses when they appear in court in both criminal and civil cases. He also reviews differences in scientific and legal conventions as they apply to expert knowledge and discusses two central reasons for these differences: adversarialism and closure.


Is It The Real Thing: How Coke's One-Way Binding Arbitration May Bridge The Divide Between Litigation And Arbitration, Suzette M. Malveaux Jan 2009

Is It The Real Thing: How Coke's One-Way Binding Arbitration May Bridge The Divide Between Litigation And Arbitration, Suzette M. Malveaux

Journal of Dispute Resolution

This article is comprised of six parts. Part I introduces the topic. Part II examines the growing prevalence of compulsory pre-dispute arbitration agreements in employment contracts and the problems with such agreements. Part III describes the challenges employees face in the federal court system: higher pleading thresholds for intentional discrimination claims, the federal judiciary's current antagonism toward employee claims of discrimination (as demonstrated by recent empirical studies), and a beleaguered EEOC. Part IV describes how Coke adopted one-way binding arbitration and explores the ways in which this alternative is preferable to both mandatory arbitration and civil litigation for employees, employers, …


Leveraging Maximum Reform While Enforcing Minimum Standards, Alphonse Gerhardstein Jan 2009

Leveraging Maximum Reform While Enforcing Minimum Standards, Alphonse Gerhardstein

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Article focuses on criminal justice reform in the context of litigation. Specifically, it offers solutions for how to promote effective policies to reduce recidivism and ultimately keep the public safe from crime. It takes the position that litigation that merely focuses on constitutional violations of prison confinement is not complete without a focus on programming and supervision options upon return to society. Part I of the Article reviews some of the problems facing efforts to improve recidivism rates, specifically litigation that solely focuses on prison conditions. Part II deals with programs that should be undertaken to reduce recidivism in …


Public Interest Litigation: Insights From Theory And Practice, Scott L. Cummings, Deborah L. Rhode Jan 2009

Public Interest Litigation: Insights From Theory And Practice, Scott L. Cummings, Deborah L. Rhode

Fordham Urban Law Journal

If public interest litigation has not always delivered all that we desire, it has surely provided no lack of experience. Our challenge now is to integrate these lessons from practice with insights from allied disciplines. Taken together, they remind us of the need to coordinate litigation with broader mobilizing efforts, to think strategically about effectiveness, and to create adequate systems of evaluation and accountability.