Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Law
Preschooler Ii V. Clark County School Board Of Trustees: A Closer Look At Application Of Qualified Immunity In Public School Districts, Rachael Crim
Golden Gate University Law Review
During the 2002-2003 school year, the mother of a pre-school aged, non-verbal, autistic child became concerned when her child came home with unexplained bruises and began exhibiting violent behavior. The mother brought an action on behalf of herself and her child seeking relief under the Individuals with Disabilities Act ("IDEA"), Americans with Disabilities Act, and claimed constitutional violations under Section 1983. In Preschooler II v. Clark County School Board of Trustees, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held: 1) teacher's alleged conduct in beating, slapping, and head-slamming child violated Fourth Amendment rights for purposes of a …
Why Fight Fought?: A Missed Erisa Opportunity In The Ninth Circuit, Jill V. Cartwright
Why Fight Fought?: A Missed Erisa Opportunity In The Ninth Circuit, Jill V. Cartwright
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Note analyzes the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit's standard of review in cases in which a conflicted administrator has denied benefits. Part I of this Note examines early standards of review prior to ERISA. Part II sets forth the split among the circuits in evaluating a conflicted administrator's denial of benefits and explains the Ninth Circuit's former standard. Part ill compares the Ninth Circuit's prior standard of finding such denials presumptively void with its recent holding in Abatie v. Alta Health & Life Insurance Company, in which the court effectively adopted a unique standard similar …
Making-Up Conditions Of Employment: The Unequal Burdens Test As A Flawed Mode Of Analysis In Jespersen V. Harrah's Operating Co., Megan Kelly
Golden Gate University Law Review
Part I of this Note reviews Title VII and foundational caselaw, including cases regarding sex discrimination and appearance standards. Part II examines the Ninth Circuit's Jespersen opinion. Part III compares the Supreme Court decision in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, which expanded Title VII protection to include gender stereotyping, with the Jespersen holding. Part III also explores a Seventh Circuit case, Carroll v. Talman Federal Savings and Loan Association of Chicago, and Judge Thomas's dissent in Jespersen, which both argue for inclusion of less tangible factors such as gender stereotyping in the unequal burdens test. Part III finally contends that the …
What Does Diversity Mean In Seattle?: Parents Involved In Community Schools V. Seattle School District Number 1 Strikes Down The Use Of A Racial Tiebreaker, Katie York
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Note examines the Ninth Circuit decision in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District Number 1. The introduction provides an overview of the evolution of race-based jurisprudence. In addition, the introduction describes the "open choice" policy established by the School District. Part I explains the progression to strict scrutiny as the applicable standard of review for race-conscious admissions policies. Part II analyzes the procedural history of the Parents Involved cases. Part III compares the admissions policies between public high schools and universities. Part IV proposes a constitutionally permissible race-conscious placement policy for secondary education. Part V concludes …
Dangerous Balance: The Ninth Circuit's Validation Of Expansive Dna Testing Of Federal Parolees, Claire S. Hulse
Dangerous Balance: The Ninth Circuit's Validation Of Expansive Dna Testing Of Federal Parolees, Claire S. Hulse
Golden Gate University Law Review
Part I provides a background of federal DNA testing legislation, the Fourth Amendment implications of DNA testing and two DNA testing cases leading up to the U.S. v. Kincade decision. Part II analyzes the plurality and dissenting opinions of the U.S. v. Kincade decision. Part III argues that the plurality's balancing test has a potential for inappropriate application. Finally, Part IV concludes that the Kincade balancing test should be narrowly applied as precedent after a meaningful balancing of interests, and not as a facade for ever-expanding government interests.
Throw A Dog A Suspect: When Using Police Dogs Becomes An Unreasonable Use Of Force Under The Fourth Amendment, Lisa K. Sloman
Throw A Dog A Suspect: When Using Police Dogs Becomes An Unreasonable Use Of Force Under The Fourth Amendment, Lisa K. Sloman
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Note contends that a dog bite lasting up to a minute is excessive force under these circumstances and violated Miller's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizures. Part I of this Note provides a general synthesis of current Fourth Amendment seizure law as it applies to using police dogs. Part II discusses the facts of Miller and the court's application of current case law to those facts. Finally, Part III argues that the court failed to properly apply existing Fourth Amendment seizure law to the facts in Miller, and therefore, the force used was unreasonable.
Expert Testimony And "Subtle Discrimination" In The Workplace: Do We Now Need A Weatherman To Know Which Way The Wind Blows?, Deborah Dyson
Expert Testimony And "Subtle Discrimination" In The Workplace: Do We Now Need A Weatherman To Know Which Way The Wind Blows?, Deborah Dyson
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Comment studies Elsayed in order to investigate these questions. The Background discussion traces the two great lines of cases whose trajectories cross in Elsayed, the Daubert v. Merrell Dow expert testimony jurisprudence under the Federal Rules of Evidence and the McDonnell Douglas v. Green line of cases establishing the "pretext" model of proof for individual employment discrimination claims under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Then, turning to the opinion proper, the Analysis considers Elsayed under the following headings: (A) The Crux: The Court's Harmless-Error Determination, (B) Decoding in the Pretext Context, (C) Substituting the Mixed-Motives Regime …
Let's All Go To The Movies, And Put An End To Disability Discrimination: Oregon Paralyzed Veterans Of America V. Regal Cinemas, Inc. Requires Comparable Viewing Angles For Wheelchair Seating, Joshua D. Watts
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Note contends that the Ninth Circuit was correct in finding that in order to ensure comparable lines of sight for disabled and non-disabled patrons, viewing angles must be taken into account. Part I provides a general background of Title III of the ADA, and specifically addresses section 4.33.3 of the ADAAG and its history. Additionally, Part I examines the Fifth Circuit's decision in Lara, as it played a major role in the outcome of the Ninth Circuit's decision in Regal. Part II analyzes both the majority and the dissenting opinions offered in Regal. Part III defends the majority opinion …
Sticks And Stones May Break Your Bones ... But Words May Break The Bank: Monetary Damages For 'True Threats' And The Future Of Free Speech After Planned Parenthood Of The Columbia/Willamette V. American Coalition Of Life Activists, Randall D. Nicholson
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Note is divided into five parts. Part I introduces the plaintiffs and defendants in Planned Parenthood and provides a detailed description of the content of the posters as well as the other evidence used to find the defendants liable for threatening speech. Part II presents a brief description of the details of, and impetus for, the enactment of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act ("FACE"), as the act provides the basis for liability. To highlight that the majority's position in Planned Parenthood did not comport with current First Amendment jurisprudence, Part III analyzes the major decisions handed …
Eldredge V. Carpenters' 46 Northern California Counties Joint Apprenticeship Training Committee: The Ninth Circuit Finally Hammers The Carpenters' Union With An Affirmative Action Plan, Unaloto-Ki-Vahanoa Halamehi Aholelei-Aonga
Eldredge V. Carpenters' 46 Northern California Counties Joint Apprenticeship Training Committee: The Ninth Circuit Finally Hammers The Carpenters' Union With An Affirmative Action Plan, Unaloto-Ki-Vahanoa Halamehi Aholelei-Aonga
Golden Gate University Law Review
No abstract provided.