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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 30 of 101

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Chancellors Are Alright: Nationwide Injunctions And An Abstention Doctrine To Salve What Ails Us, Ezra Ishmael Young Jun 2021

The Chancellors Are Alright: Nationwide Injunctions And An Abstention Doctrine To Salve What Ails Us, Ezra Ishmael Young

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article endeavors to reclaim the nationwide injunction as a valid exercise of federal equity power within the jurisdictional limits set by Article III. It posits that federal equity is expansive—it extends as far as necessary to provide a remedy where there is no adequate one at law. Historical and doctrinal context and critique are deployed to demonstrate that nationwide injunctions are not constitutionally ultra vires. This Article also posits that despite having expansive equity jurisdiction and powers, federal courts can and should in many cases exercise their constitutional discretion when sitting in equity to abstain in certain nationwide ...


Hard Battles Over Soft Law: The Troubling Implications Of Insurance Industry Attacks On The American Law Institute Restatement Of The Law Of Liability Insurance, Jeffrey W. Stempel Apr 2021

Hard Battles Over Soft Law: The Troubling Implications Of Insurance Industry Attacks On The American Law Institute Restatement Of The Law Of Liability Insurance, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Cleveland State Law Review

ALI Restatements of the Law have traditionally exerted significant influence over court decisions and the development of the common law. During the past two decades, however, the ALI has seen an upsurge in interest group activity designed to shape or even thwart aspects of the Institute’s work. Most recently, the Restatement of the Law of Liability Insurance (RLLI) has been the focus of not only criticism of particular provisions but a concerted effort by members of the insurance industry to demonize the project as a whole and bar use of the document by courts.

The vehemence of insurer opposition ...


"Clerical Mistake In A Judgment" Under Israeli And American Procedural Law – A New Model, Yitshak Cohen Apr 2021

"Clerical Mistake In A Judgment" Under Israeli And American Procedural Law – A New Model, Yitshak Cohen

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article examines the development and efficiency of the procedure for correction of a clerical mistake in a judgment in the Israeli law. As is well known, the procedure offers a short and simple way to correct an error in language within a decision. The litigants may file a motion to correct a decision in the same court that granted it, without having to file an appeal in the appellate court. The difficulty, however, is that this procedure contains three fundamental flaws that might even hinder its purpose: First, the law binds the parties and the court to the same ...


Changing The Rule That Changes Nothing: Protecting Evicted Tenants By Amending Cleveland Housing Court Rule 6.13, James J. Scherer Apr 2021

Changing The Rule That Changes Nothing: Protecting Evicted Tenants By Amending Cleveland Housing Court Rule 6.13, James J. Scherer

Cleveland State Law Review

Renting is on the rise, with all households seeing an increase in the prevalence of renting a home versus owning one from 2006 to 2016. As rental rates rise, so too do the rates of eviction. The detrimental effects of eviction are numerous and can be self-reinforcing, with a single eviction decreasing one’s chances of securing decent and affordable housing, escaping disadvantaged neighborhoods, and benefiting from affordable housing programs. All this was before the coronavirus pandemic that devastated jobs and savings accounts across the nation.

One of the biggest impacts that eviction has on renters is a public court ...


The Shifting Sands Of Cost Shifting, Andrew M. Pardieck Mar 2021

The Shifting Sands Of Cost Shifting, Andrew M. Pardieck

Cleveland State Law Review

The cost-shifting analysis employed by the federal courts in ruling on discovery disputes is flawed. There is tremendous variability in how courts interpret the factors guiding the analysis. There is tremendous variability in the information courts rely on in deciding whether to preclude the discovery or shift its costs. The result is waste for the litigants, courts, and society as a whole. This Article argues that there is a better way: mandate cooperation before cost shifting. The courts should condition proportionality and cost-shifting rulings on cooperation. The cooperation should be substantive: require disclosure of objective information about the disputed discovery ...


The Ambiguity And Unfairness Of Dismissing Bad Writing, Benjamin D. Raker Nov 2020

The Ambiguity And Unfairness Of Dismissing Bad Writing, Benjamin D. Raker

Cleveland State Law Review

Courts routinely choose to explicitly dismiss arguments and issues raised by parties, regardless of their merit, based on unexplained determinations that the briefing was bad. This practice, which I call abandonment by poor presentation, is sometimes justified by practicality, by pointing to federal and local rules, by waiver and forfeiture doctrines, and by the norm of party presentation. None of these justifications hold water. I contend that the real reason judges find abandonment by poor presentation is agenda control: judges rely on the practice as a means of retaining control over how they decide cases. This unexplained, poorly justified, and ...


Land Of The Free, If You Can Afford It: Reforming Mayor's Courts In Ohio, Lucia Lopez-Hisijos Apr 2020

Land Of The Free, If You Can Afford It: Reforming Mayor's Courts In Ohio, Lucia Lopez-Hisijos

Cleveland State Law Review

Unlike most states in America, Ohio has a unique system of punishing minor misdemeanors and ordinance violations through municipal institutions called mayor’s courts. In 2017, Ohio had 295 of these courts, and they heard nearly 300,000 cases. But these are not normal courts. Ohio’s mayor’s courts do not conduct ability to pay hearings and can jail defendants who fail to pay court fines. With the author’s original research into Ohio’s mayor’s courts, this Note argues that these institutions can function like modern-day debtor’s prisons and violate indigent defendants’ constitutional right to Due ...


Decoding Judicial Reasoning In China: A Comparative Empirical Analysis Of Guiding Cases, Runhua Wang Apr 2020

Decoding Judicial Reasoning In China: A Comparative Empirical Analysis Of Guiding Cases, Runhua Wang

Cleveland State Law Review

The judicial system in China recently started using legal precedents—known as guiding cases—as a new legal source to eliminate adjudicative inconsistency. Guiding cases (“GCs”) present the current judicial reasoning to some extent and can be used to predict the future of judicial reasoning in China. What are GCs? What legal issues do GCs address? How do they address legal issues? How do GCs affect the legal system and adjudication in China? This Article answers these questions with empirical evidence and comparisons to judicial reasoning in the United States. It is the first empirical research providing a systematic review ...


An Open Letter To The Ohio Supreme Court: Setting A Uniform Standard On Anders Briefs, Matthew D. Fazekas Apr 2020

An Open Letter To The Ohio Supreme Court: Setting A Uniform Standard On Anders Briefs, Matthew D. Fazekas

Cleveland State Law Review

Attorneys are faced with an ethical dilemma when they represent indigent defendants who wish to appeal a criminal sentence, but that appeal would be frivolous. In 1967, the United States Supreme Court, in Anders v. California, introduced a procedure protecting the rights of indigent defendants that balanced the ethical concerns of an attorney forced to file a frivolous appeal. In 2000, the Court in Smith v. Robbins held that the states can set their own procedure for the aforementioned ethical dilemma, so long as it protects the rights of indigent defendants in compliance with the Fourteenth Amendment. This has led ...


The Federal Sentencing Guidelines: A Guideline To Remedy Ohio's Sentencing Disparities For White-Collar Criminal Defendants, Joelle Livorse Mar 2020

The Federal Sentencing Guidelines: A Guideline To Remedy Ohio's Sentencing Disparities For White-Collar Criminal Defendants, Joelle Livorse

Cleveland State Law Review

Over the past few decades, white-collar crimes have significantly increased across the country, especially in Ohio. However, Ohio’s judges are ill-equipped to handle the influx of cases. Unlike federal judges who are guided by the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Ohio’s judges have significantly more sentencing discretion because the Ohio legislature provides minimal guidance for these crimes. As a result, Ohio’s white-collar criminal defendants are experiencing dramatic sentencing variations. To solve this problem, Ohio should look to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and neighboring states to adopt and create an innovative sentencing model tailored to ...


A Call To Clarify The "Scope Of Authority" Question Of Qualified Immunity, Pat Fackrell Nov 2019

A Call To Clarify The "Scope Of Authority" Question Of Qualified Immunity, Pat Fackrell

Cleveland State Law Review

It is no secret the doctrine of qualified immunity is under immense scrutiny. Distinguished jurists and scholars at all levels have criticized the doctrine of qualified immunity, some calling for it to be reconsidered or overruled entirely.

Amidst this scrutiny lies uncertainty in the doctrine’s application. Specifically, the federal courts of appeal are split three ways on the question of whether an official exceeding the official’s scope of authority under state law at the time of the alleged constitutional violation can successfully assert qualified immunity. Some courts of appeal do not require the official to demonstrate he acted ...


Dehumanization, Immigrants, And Equal Protection, Reginald Oh Oct 2019

Dehumanization, Immigrants, And Equal Protection, Reginald Oh

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This article is divided into three parts. Part I explores the concept of dehumanization and its central role in the subordination of marginalized groups. Part II discusses the equal protection doctrine of suspect classes by analyzing key decisions by the Court and its reasoning for whether or not to consider a particular group as a suspect class. Part II also argues that the decision in Brown v. Board of Education regards racial segregation in public schools as a form of racial dehumanization and provides the doctrinal basis to consider dehumanization a central factor in determining suspect class status. Part III ...


Ohio's Targeted Community Alternative To Prison Program: How A Good Idea Is Implemented Through Bad Policy, Samantha Sohl May 2019

Ohio's Targeted Community Alternative To Prison Program: How A Good Idea Is Implemented Through Bad Policy, Samantha Sohl

Cleveland State Law Review

Just because a legislature can make a law doesn’t mean that they should. The Ohio General Assembly enacted the Targeted Community Alternatives to Prison (T-CAP) program to decrease the number of convicted defendants sent to state prison and to increase funding for community control efforts. While the law may be upheld under the Ohio Constitution’s Uniformity Clause, the law should still be repealed because legislative control and financial influence have no place in the judicial branch, specifically the criminal sentencing process. However, the law is rooted in good intentions, and many judges have found the additional funding useful ...


The Faith And Morals Of Justice Antonin Scalia, David Forte Jan 2019

The Faith And Morals Of Justice Antonin Scalia, David Forte

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

It is because of Justice Scalia's suspicion of philosophy and of history that he becomes an outspoken textualist. But why should text carry greater authority? Why should the written word, rather than evolving tradition, be of higher authority, particularly to a Roman Catholic? To understand Antonin Scalia's affirmation of the centrality of text, we must, as many already have, seek to find out how the man viewed his religion and how he practiced it.


Platforms, American Express, And The Problem Of Complexity In Antitrust, Chris Sagers Jan 2019

Platforms, American Express, And The Problem Of Complexity In Antitrust, Chris Sagers

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Everything about Ohio v. American Express was wrong and the adoption of “two-sided platform” reasoning into American antitrust law might be one of its worst, most regrettable wrong turns in decades. That is not because the original theoretical model of two-sided interaction has anything wrong with it at all. It is rather that nothing could be gained by incorporating it that could be worth the result in the American Express case itself, or the difficulty that has likely been invited into antitrust litigation. The consequences are hard to predict, but they may be severely limiting to our already moribund antitrust ...


Artis V. District Of Columbia—What Did The Court Actually Say?, Doron M. Kalir Jan 2018

Artis V. District Of Columbia—What Did The Court Actually Say?, Doron M. Kalir

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

On January 22, 2018, the Supreme Court issued Artis v. District of Columbia. A true "clash of the titans," this 5-4 decision featured colorful comments on both sides, claims of "absurdities," uncited use of Alice in Wonderland vocabulary ("curiouser," anyone?), and an especially harsh accusation by the dissent that "we’ve wandered so far from the idea of a federal government of limited and enumerated powers that we’ve begun to lose sight of what it looked like in the first place."

One might assume that the issue in question was a complex constitutional provision, or a dense, technical federal ...


Ohio's Modern Courts Amendment Must Be Amended: Why And How, Richard S. Walinski, Mark D. Wagoner Jr. Dec 2017

Ohio's Modern Courts Amendment Must Be Amended: Why And How, Richard S. Walinski, Mark D. Wagoner Jr.

Cleveland State Law Review

A 1968 amendment to the Ohio Constitution granted the Supreme Court of Ohio the authority to promulgate “rules governing practice and procedure” for Ohio courts. The amendment also provided that “[a]ll laws in conflict with such rules shall be of no further force or effect after such rules have taken effect” and that no rule may “abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive right.”

Although the amendment was explicit about automatic repeal of existing laws, it says nothing about whether the General Assembly may legislate on a procedural matter after a court rule takes effect. That silence has caused enduring ...


Stuck In Ohio's Legal Limbo, How Many Mistrials Are Too Many Mistrials?: Exploring New Factors That Help A Trial Judge In Ohio Know Whether To Exercise Her Authority To Dismiss An Indictment With Prejudice, Especially Following Repeated Hung Juries, Samantha M. Cira Dec 2017

Stuck In Ohio's Legal Limbo, How Many Mistrials Are Too Many Mistrials?: Exploring New Factors That Help A Trial Judge In Ohio Know Whether To Exercise Her Authority To Dismiss An Indictment With Prejudice, Especially Following Repeated Hung Juries, Samantha M. Cira

Cleveland State Law Review

Multiple mistrials following validly-prosecuted trials are becoming an increasingly harsh reality in today’s criminal justice system. Currently, the Ohio Supreme Court has not provided any guidelines to help its trial judges know when to make the crucial decision to dismiss an indictment with prejudice following a string of properly-declared mistrials, especially due to repeated hung juries. Despite multiple mistrials that continue to result in no conviction, criminal defendants often languish behind bars, suffering detrimental psychological harm and a loss of personal freedom as they remain in “legal limbo” waiting to retry their case. Furthermore, continuously retrying defendants cuts against ...


How Big Money Ruined Public Life In Wisconsin, Lynn Adelman Dec 2017

How Big Money Ruined Public Life In Wisconsin, Lynn Adelman

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article discusses how Wisconsin fell from grace. Once a model good government state that pioneered many democracy-enhancing laws, in a very short time, Wisconsin became a state where special interest money, most of which is undisclosed, dominates politics. This Article identifies several factors as being critical to Wisconsin’s descent. These include the state’s failure to nurture and build on the campaign finance reforms enacted in the 1970s and both the state’s and the United States Supreme Court’s failure to adequately regulate sham issue ads. As evidence of Wisconsin’s diminished status, this Article describes how ...


The Duty To Charge In Police Use Of Excessive Force Cases, Rebecca Roiphe Jul 2017

The Duty To Charge In Police Use Of Excessive Force Cases, Rebecca Roiphe

Cleveland State Law Review

Responding to the problems of mass incarceration, racial disparities in justice, and wrongful convictions, scholars have focused on prosecutorial overcharging. They have, however, neglected to address undercharging—the failure to charge in entire classes of cases. Undercharging can similarly undermine the efficacy and legitimacy of the criminal justice system. While few have focused on this question in the domestic criminal law context, international law scholars have long recognized the social and structural cost for nascent democratic states when they fail to charge those responsible for the prior regime’s human rights abuses. This sort of impunity threatens the rule of ...


The Role Of The Prosecutor And The Grand Jury In Police Use Of Deadly Force Cases: Restoring The Grand Jury To Its Original Purpose, Ric Simmons Jul 2017

The Role Of The Prosecutor And The Grand Jury In Police Use Of Deadly Force Cases: Restoring The Grand Jury To Its Original Purpose, Ric Simmons

Cleveland State Law Review

In deciding whether and what to charge in a criminal case, the prosecutor looks to three different factors. The first is legal: is there probable cause that the defendant committed this crime? The second is practical: if the case goes to trial, will there be sufficient evidence to convict the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt of this crime? And the third is equitable: should the defendant be charged with this crime? The prosecutor is uniquely qualified to answer the first and second question, but the third is a bit trickier. If it is used properly, the grand jury could provide ...


Restoring Independence To The Grand Jury: A Victim Advocate For The Police Use Of Force Cases, Jonathan Witmer-Rich Jul 2017

Restoring Independence To The Grand Jury: A Victim Advocate For The Police Use Of Force Cases, Jonathan Witmer-Rich

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article proposes a grand jury victim advocate to represent the interests of the complainant before the grand jury in investigations into police use of excessive force. Currently, the prosecutor has near-exclusive access to the grand jury, and as a result, grand juries have become almost entirely dependent on prosecutors. Historically, however, grand juries exhibited much greater independence. In particular, grand juries have a long history in America of providing oversight over government officials, bringing criminal charges for official misconduct even when local prosecutors proved reluctant. Permitting the alleged victim of police excessive force to be represented before the grand ...


Chief Justice William Howard Taft's Conception Of Judicial Integrity: The Legal History Of Tumey V. Ohio, Joshua Kastenberg Jun 2017

Chief Justice William Howard Taft's Conception Of Judicial Integrity: The Legal History Of Tumey V. Ohio, Joshua Kastenberg

Cleveland State Law Review

In 1927, Chief Justice William Howard Taft led a unanimous Court to determine that, at minimum, the right to an impartial and independent judiciary meant that the judge had to lack a personal interest in the outcome of the trial. While the decision, Tumey v. Ohio, was based on a judge’s pecuniary interest, it was also part of Taft’s efforts to ensure that the nation’s judges, from the municipal courts to the Supreme Court had the public’s confidence in their integrity. Tumey, therefore, is not simply a decision on pecuniary interests. It can, and should, be ...


The Trial Lawyer And The Reptilian Brain: A Critique, Louis J. Sirico, Jr. Jun 2017

The Trial Lawyer And The Reptilian Brain: A Critique, Louis J. Sirico, Jr.

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article brings together neuroscience, cultural symbolism, and the strategies of practicing lawyers to critique the reptile strategy, now popular among trial lawyers. The strategy directs the lawyer to trigger the reptilian brains of jurors so that they react instinctively to threats to themselves and their communities. When humans feel threatened, the reptilian brain, the most primitive part of the brain, takes charge and instinctively controls human conduct. Therefore, if a lawyer can make a juror feel threatened, the lawyer makes an appeal to the juror’s reptilian brain and virtually assures a victory. Thus, a lawyer’s argument should ...


The Empirics Of Child Custody, Margaret Ryznar May 2017

The Empirics Of Child Custody, Margaret Ryznar

Cleveland State Law Review

Child custody issues are as American as apple pie, with only a quarter of children seeing their parents married until the end. The legal standard for custody is the best interests of the child, but the greyness of this inquiry allows courts to make difficult judgments. In family law, such discretionary standards govern factually diverse cases and make it difficult to draw conclusions from individual cases. This Article offers an objective measurement in family law by empirically examining a sample of Indiana divorce cases filed during three months in 2008 that involved children. The resulting analysis of child custody and ...


The Replacements: Conflicting Standards For Obtaining New Counsel Under The Sixth Amendment, Sharon Finegan May 2017

The Replacements: Conflicting Standards For Obtaining New Counsel Under The Sixth Amendment, Sharon Finegan

Cleveland State Law Review

In 2006, the Supreme Court handed down a decision in United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez emphasizing the importance of a defendant’s right to counsel of choice under the Sixth Amendment and holding a denial of this right constitutes structural error, requiring automatic reversal. Following that decision, several federal circuit courts and state appellate courts have questioned how to apply this right to circumstances where the right to choice of counsel and the right to appointed counsel overlap. When a defendant seeks to replace retained counsel for appointed counsel, should the standard governing his motion fall under the right to choice ...


Choosing A Court To Review The Executive, Joseph Mead, Nicholas Fromherz Jan 2015

Choosing A Court To Review The Executive, Joseph Mead, Nicholas Fromherz

Urban Publications

For more than one hundred years, Congress has experimented with review of agency action by single-judge district courts, multiple-judge district courts, and direct review by circuit courts. This tinkering has not given way to a stable design. Rather than settling on a uniform scheme—or at least a scheme with a discernible organizing principle—Congress has left litigants with a jurisdictional maze that varies unpredictably across and within statutes and agencies.In this Article, we offer a fresh look at the theoretical and empirical factors that ought to inform the allocation of the judicial power between district and circuit courts ...


Choosing A Court To Review The Executive, Joseph Mead, Nicholas Fromherz Jan 2015

Choosing A Court To Review The Executive, Joseph Mead, Nicholas Fromherz

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

For more than one hundred years, Congress has experimented with review of agency action by single-judge district courts, multiple-judge district courts, and direct review by circuit courts. This tinkering has not given way to a stable design. Rather than settling on a uniform scheme—or at least a scheme with a discernible organizing principle— Congress has left litigants with a jurisdictional maze that varies unpredictably across and within statutes and agencies.

In this Article, we offer a fresh look at the theoretical and empirical factors that ought to inform the allocation of the judicial power between district and circuit courts ...


The Rapid Rise Of Delayed Notice Searches, And The Fourth Amendment "Rule Requiring Notice", Jonathan Witmer-Rich Jan 2014

The Rapid Rise Of Delayed Notice Searches, And The Fourth Amendment "Rule Requiring Notice", Jonathan Witmer-Rich

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This article documents the rapid rise of covert searching, through delayed notice search warrants, and argues that covert searching in its current form presumptively violates the Fourth Amendment's "rule requiring notice."

Congress authorized these "sneak and peek" warrants in the USA Patriot Act of 2001, and soon after added a reporting requirement to monitor this invasive search technique. Since 2001, the use of delayed notice search warrants has risen dramatically, from around 25 in 2002 to 5601 in 2012, suggesting that "sneak and peek" searches are becoming alarmingly common. In fact, it is not at all clear whether true ...


Selecting The Very Best: The Selection Of High-Level Judges In The United States, Europe And Asia, Christa J. Laser, Tefft Smith, Michael Fragoso, Christopher Jackson, Gregory Wannier Nov 2013

Selecting The Very Best: The Selection Of High-Level Judges In The United States, Europe And Asia, Christa J. Laser, Tefft Smith, Michael Fragoso, Christopher Jackson, Gregory Wannier

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This paper has been prepared by Kirkland & Ellis LLP for the Due Process of Law Foundation (“DPLF”), an organization dedicated to promoting and strengthening the rule of law and the respect for human rights in the Americas. The goal is to provide further stimulus to the enhancement of due process and the rule of law in Latin America by encouraging the transparent, merit-based selection and appointment of competent, independent, and impartial judges. An independent and impartial judiciary is an essential precondition to the effective operation of the rule of law, with due process for all. This, in turn, is vital ...