Law Commons^™

Confirm Judge Koh For The Ninth Circuit, Carl Tobias

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

On February 25, 2016, President Barack Obama appointed United States District Court Judge Lucy Haeran Koh for a judicial emergency vacancy on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The jurist has served professionally for more than six years in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, ably resolving major litigation. Thus, White House efforts to confirm her were unsurprising. Nevertheless, 2016 is a presidential election year when delay infuses many court appointments. That conundrum was exacerbated because the United States Senate Republican majority refused to even consider United States Court of Appeals …

Attracting Undue Scrutiny On Appeal: An Appellate Judge's Perspective, Marshall L. Davidson Iii

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Infrequently Asked Questions, Edward T. Swaine

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

If appellate advocates could hear from courts about topics that might be raised during oral argument—as opposed to relying solely on their ability to anticipate the issues—might their answers be better? That seems likely, but it is unlikely that research could confirm that, as judicial practice overwhelmingly favors impromptu questioning. Spontaneity may be harmless if the question was predictable, or unavoidable if a judge just thought of the question. But sometimes advocates have to answer challenging questions concerning the law, facts, or implications of a position—questions that help decide the case, either due to the quality of the answer or …

Out Of The Black Hole: Toward A Fresh Approach To Tort Causation, Allan C. Hutchinson

Dalhousie Law Journal

The present state of Canadian doctrine on causation in tort law is in serious disarray Judges and jurists persist in thinking that it is a factual inquiry separate from policy concerns. This is made obvious in the recent Supreme Court decision in Clements and in the academic commentary around it. In contrast, I insist that the requirement of causation must be understood as being entirely part of the broader debate on the goals and policies of tort law generally Causation is a topic drenched with normative values and should be treated as such.

Book Review Of "Divergent Paths: The Academy And The Judiciary" By Richard A. Posner, Michael C. Dorf

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Hurst V. Florida’S Ha’P’Orth Of Tar: The Need To Revisit Caldwell, Clemons, And Proffitt, Craig Trocino, Chance Meyer

University of Miami Law Review

In Hurst v. Florida, the Supreme Court held Florida’s death penalty scheme violated the Sixth Amendment because judges, rather than juries, found sentencing facts necessary to impose death. That Sixth Amendment ruling has implications for Florida’s Eighth Amendment jurisprudence.

Under the Eighth Amendment rule of Caldwell v. Mississippi, capital juries must appreciate their responsibility for death sentencing. Yet, Florida has instructed juries that their fact-findings merely support sentencing recommendations, while leaving the ultimate sentencing decision to a judge. Because Hurst clarifies that the Sixth Amendment requires juries to find the operative set of facts on which sentences are …

The Judge As Umpire: Ten Principles, Brett M. Kavanaugh

Catholic University Law Review

In his speech, Judge Kavanaugh discusses the notion of Judges as umpires and sets forth ten principles that are vital for an impartial judiciary dedicated to the rule of law in our separation of powers system. According to Judge Kavanaugh, Judges cannot act as partisans, must follow establish rules and principles, and must strive for consistency, not only in terms of respecting precedent, but from day to day, in how they decide cases, confront issues, interpret statutes and interpret the Constitution.

Judges must also understand that their role is to apply the rules rather than remake the rules according to …

Online Case Resolution Systems: Enhancing Access, Fairness, Accuracy, And Efficiency, Maximilian A. Bulinski, J.J. Prescott

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

Online case resolution (OCR) systems have the potential to dramatically increase access to our justice system. Part I introduces the concept of an OCR system, how it might work in practice, and its likely impact on courts and citizens. Part II argues that OCR systems can lower many of the barriers to going to court by reducing the need for face-to-face resolution of disputes; cutting the amount of time needed for hearings; mitigating litigant confusion and fear; allowing asynchronous scheduling that can accommodate work and child-care schedules; and offering a more reliable and easier-to-use means for litigants to voice their …

Friendly Precedent, Anthony Niblett, Albert H. Yoon

William & Mary Law Review

This Article explores which legal precedents judges choose to support their decisions.When describing the legal landscape in a written opinion, which precedent do judges gravitate toward? We examine the idea that judges are more likely to cite “friendly” precedent. A friendly precedent, here, is one that was delivered by Supreme Court Justices who have similar political preferences to the lower court judges delivering the opinion. In this Article, we test whether a federal Court of Appeals panel is more likely to engage with binding Supreme Court precedent when the political flavor of that precedent is aligned with the political composition …

Deciding Not To Decide: A Limited Defense Of The Silent Concurrence, Alexander I. Platt

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

The Changing Odds Of The Chancery Lottery, Marianna Wonder

Fordham Law Review

Delaware is home to the majority of shareholder class action litigations related to mergers and acquisitions (M&A). These cases usually result in settlements that provide shareholders with only disclosure in exchange for a broad release of future claims, which encompasses unknown and federal security claims. The Delaware Court of Chancery must review and approve these settlements under Delaware Rule 23(e), which has been interpreted as creating a fiduciary duty for the court to protect the interests of absent shareholders. Nevertheless, Delaware has a history of routinely approving disclosure-only settlements with laxity. Recently, members of the court have begun discussing the …

Nom De Plume: Who Writes The Supreme Court's "By The Court" Judgments?, Peter Mccormick

Dalhousie Law Journal

For several dozen of its major decisions, the Supreme Court in recent decades has adopted an unusual judgment style-the unanimous and anonymous "By the Court" format. Unlike judgments attributed to specific justices, "By the Court" presents an unusual and impersonal institutionalist face. But what is happening behind the fagade? Are these deeply collegial products with the actual drafting divided between some (or most, or all) of the justices? Is it "business as usual" which for major judgments involves rotation between the senior judges? Or is it simply a pseudonym for the Chief Justice writing alone in an unusually emphatic way? …

The Management Of Staff By Federal Court Of Appeals Judges, Mitu Gulati, Richard A. Posner

Vanderbilt Law Review

Federal court of appeals judges have staffs consisting usually of a secretary and four law clerks; some judges have externs as well (law students working part time without pay). These staffs are essential, given judicial workloads and judges'limitations. Yet not much is known about how the judges manage their staffs. Each judge knows, of course, but judges rarely exchange information about staff management. Nor is there, to our knowledge, a literature that attempts to compare and evaluate the varieties of staff management techniques employed by federal court of appeals judges. This Essay aims to fill that gap. It is based …

Opinions I Should Have Written, Judge Nancy Gertner (Ret.)

Northwestern University Law Review

In 1991, the Chicago law firm of Pope & John Ltd. established a lecture series at Northwestern University School of Law. The Pope & John Lecture on Professionalism focuses on the many dimensions of a lawyer’s professional responsibility, including legal ethics, public service, professional civility, pro bono representation, and standards of conduct. The Northwestern University Law Review is pleased to present the November 12, 2014 Pope & John Lecture by Judge Nancy Gertner.

Recovering Judicial Integrity: Toward A Duty-Focused Disqualification Jurisprudence Based On Jewish Law, Shlomo Pill

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Reversal By Recusal? Comer V. Murphy Oil U.S.A., Inc. And The Needfor Mandatory Judicial Recusal Statements, Patrick A. Woods

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] "In many cases, if not most, voluntary judicial recusal is both an efficient use of judicial resources and an exceptional safeguard to the legitimacy of the federal judiciary. However, voluntary judicial recusal poses its own unique problems when the withdrawing judge declines to issue a statement explaining the statutory grounds for his or her recusal. Unlike when a party seeks to disqualify a judge by motion—where the reasons for recusal will, at a minimum, be set out in the motion papers—when a judge voluntarily recuses, there is not necessarily any record created as to the reasons for the recusal. …

The Founding Fathers Said I Am Not Subject To Term Limits, Elias Arroyo

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Expert Prevalence, Persuasion And Price: What Trial Participants Really Think About Experts, Andrew W. Jurs

Indiana Law Journal

By measuring how expert witnesses are actually used in court, this study offers important new data about what makes expert effective and suggests that some commonly held beliefs about experts are misguided. In doing so, the data establishes an important new baseline for measuring expert witnesses in court, updating and expanding on prior research in the field.