Law Commons^™

Too Many Remedies Or Not Enough: Balancing Wage Theft And Other Public Policy Concerns In Voris V. Lampert, Tina Kuang

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Making A Declaration: The Rise Of Declaratory Judgment Actions And The Insurer As Regulator In The Fight To End Sex Trafficking In The Hotel Industry, Lori N. Ross

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

“Let it not be said that I was silent when they needed me.”

– William Wilberforce

A Storm Is Brewing: How Federal Ambivalence Regarding Below-Cost Pricing Turns A Blind Eye To Monopoly Risk In The Beer Market, Daniel Croxall

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

Large beer manufacturers, known colloquially as “Big Beer,” have been steadily losing market share to small, independent craft breweries. Big Beer wants it market share back, and in some cases will go to great lengths to try to defend its dominance—even anticompetitive conduct. Below-cost pricing is one avenue that presents a risk to independent craft breweries. This Article examines how Big Beer can manipulate the beer market in its favor by engaging in predatory pricing. Further, this Article proposes a solution that could be implemented on a nation-wide scale to curtail Big Beer’s anticompetitive activities with respect to pricing.

Empirical Findings In Need Of A Theory—In Defense Of Institutional Investors, Ittai Paldor

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

In recent years theorists have argued that institutional investors’ diversification harms competition. The theory is that when portfolio firms are cross-owned by institutional investors, managements compete less vigorously than they would have but for the cross ownership. The theory was bolstered by several empirical studies. The supporting empirical studies have been contested on methodological grounds, and some recent empirical studies make contradicting findings. But the theory of competitive harm itself is still considered persuasive. The federal antitrust agencies and competition agencies across the globe have begun to take action against instances of cross ownership based on this theory, in what …

Sb 206: The Beginning Of The End For Athletic Exploitation, Rachel Rosenblum

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Structure, Institutional Relationships And Text: Revisiting Charles Black’S White Lectures, Richard C. Boldt

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

Fundamental questions about constitutional interpretation and meaning invite a close examination of the complicated origins and the subsequent elaboration of the very structure of federalism. The available records of the Proceedings in the Federal Convention make clear that the Framers entertained two approaches to delineating the powers of the central government relative to those retained by the states. The competing approaches, one reliant on a formalist enumeration of permissible powers, the other operating functionally on the basis of a broad dynamic concept of state incompetence and national interest, often are presented as mutually inconsistent narratives. In fact, these two approaches …

Cruise Ship And Crime: How To Better Protect United States’ Citizens Who Are Victims Of Crime On The High Seas, Eda Harotounian

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reexamining Joint Employment Wage And Hour Claims Following Dynamex And Ab 5, Alexander Moore

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Warner Bros. V. Nelson: A Prelude To The De Havilland Law, John M. Broderick

Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review

In 1944, the California Court of Appeals handed down its landmark decision in De Haviland v. Warner Bros ending the practice of studios extending personal service contracts beyond the statutory limit of seven years by adding suspension periods incurred during the contract term. “Suspension/extension” could double the term of an actor’s contract. The De Haviland case has justly received much attention, but an earlier case, Warner Bros. v. Nelson, in which Bette Davis also challenged the practice of suspension/extension, merits more attention than it has received.

In Warner Bros. Nelson, Davis argued that her studio contract should not …

Flash Infringement 2.0: Protecting “Unique Performance” From Live Social Media Distribution As A Right Of Publicity, Michael M. Epstein

Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review

This Article posits that state law right of publicity actions offer a potential remedy for non-musical performers who fall victim to the phenomenon of “flash infringement,” the instantaneous and unauthorized uploading and dissemination of performances by live event audiences. In 2021, comedians, actors and magicians, may be able to use the right of publicity to protect the value of their unique performances, since their non-musical acts are not covered by the Federal Anti-Bootlegging Statute. Moreover, under California law, secondary liability actions with respect to this unique performance right might allow performers to sue social media companies for providing a commercial …

Reimagining Content Moderation: Section 230 And The Path To Industry-Government Cooperation, Yeva Mikaelyan

Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review

In February 2020, the Ninth Circuit held that YouTube, as a private entity, does not have to provide First Amendment protections to its content creators. The holding was not surprising or groundbreaking, but the case served as catalyst in the discussion of how platforms should moderate content. This was further amplified when over the summer, Twitter started to add warnings under some of President Donald Trump’s tweets. In response, the President called to “REVOKE 230.”

“230” refers to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. At a high level, Section 230 allows platforms to moderate content at their discretion without …

Willful Blindness As Mere Evidence, Gregory M. Gilchrist

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The willful blindness doctrine at criminal law is well-established and generally fits with moral intuitions of guilt. It also stands in direct tension with the first principle of American criminal law: legality. This Article argues that courts could largely preserve the doctrine and entirely avoid the legality problem with a simple shift: willful blindness ought to be reconceptualized as a form of evidence.

Whose Rights Matter More—Police Privacy Or A Defendant’S Right To A Fair Trial?, Laurie L. Levenson

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The function of the prosecutor under the federal Constitution is not to tack as many skins of victims as possible to the wall. His function is to vindicate the right of the people as expressed in the laws and give those accused of crime a fair trial.

– William O. Douglas

Goodridge V. Department Of Public Health, Same-Sex Marriage, And The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court As Critical Social Movement Ally, Carlo A. Pedrioli

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

“[I]t is circular reasoning, not analysis, to maintain that marriage must remain a heterosexual institution because that is what it historically has been.”

Preemptive Dicta: The Problem Created By Judicial Efficiency, Judith M. Stinson

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

Judges regularly espouse dicta. Traditional obiter dicta, remarks that are clearly asides and not about issues considered in the case, can be easily ignored by subsequent courts. But one particular form of dicta is especially problematic because it is more difficult to ignore. Judicial efficiency dicta are statements in judicial opinions about issues involved in the case and likely to present themselves again, but not necessary for the outcome of the case. While those statements are often about issues actually considered and may contribute to judicial efficiency by saving courts time when reconsidering issues already litigated, just like obiter dicta, …

Free Speech In The Balance: Judicial Sanctions And Frivolous Slapp Suits, Shine Sean Tu, Nicholas F. Stump

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The balance between free speech and access to courts in defamation tort actions is fraught with public policy concerns. On one hand, plaintiffs should have unencumbered access to the justice system to remedy real harms brought upon them by defamatory statements. However, defamation suits should not be wielded to suppress the constitutionally protected free speech rights of news organizations and of concerned citizens that are vital for well-functioning democracies. This Article argues for a new type of remedy, namely enhanced Rule 11 attorney sanctions, such as suspension or debarment, that should be available to defendants of defamation suits brought by …

The Coronavirus Pandemic Shutdown And Distributive Justice: Why Courts Should Refocus The Fifth Amendment Takings Analysis, Timothy M. Harris

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The 2020 Coronavirus Pandemic and the ensuing shutdown of private businesses—to promote the public’ s health and safety— demonstrated the wide reach of state and local governments’ police power. Many businesses closed and many went bankrupt as various government programs failed to keep their enterprises afloat.

These businesses were shut down to further the national interest in stemming a global pandemic. This is an archetypal example of regulating for the public health—preventing a direct threat that sickened hundreds of thousands of Americans. But some businesses were disproportionately hit while others flourished. Many who bore the brunt of these regulations sued, …

Where Law Meets Equity: Evidentiary Hearings Under California Business And Professions Code Section 7031, Eric R. Reed

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

California’ s contractor licensing statutes severely penalize unlicensed contractors. Even a brief license disruption may result in a contractor being unable to collect unpaid invoices or having to disgorge money received for past work. Courts began developing a “substantial compliance” exception to these statutes shortly after the legislature enacted them. This institutional tug-of-war prompted the legislature to codify the exception in section 7031(e) of the California Business and Professions Code, and, later, to create a unique stand-alone procedure for adjudicating substantial compliance. Section 7031(e) refers to this procedure as an “evidentiary hearing” but gives little guidance about how to conduct …

Influencers: Not So Fluent In Disclosure Compliance, Keith Coop

Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review

The Fyre Festival is one of the most infamous disasters in music festival history. Lesser known to the public is that the influencers involved in Fyre Festival’s influencer marketing campaign were required to disclose their payments for endorsing the event. These types of disclosures are regulated by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) pursuant to its authority granted under the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”). The disclosure requirement is set forth in the FTC’s Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising (“Endorsement Guides”), which are nonbinding instructions that educate influencers on how to comply with Section 5 …

Reorganizing In The Wake Of Mission Prod. Holdings V. Tempnology: How To Address The Trademark And Bankruptcy Law Issues Created By The Supreme Court’S Recent Decision, Kayla N. Ghasemi

Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review

Bankruptcy law seeks to provide a “fresh start” for debtors and an equitable distribution of funds to creditors. Trademark law, on the other hand, aims to ensure proper source identification and protect the public from deception. These policies converge when a trademark owner or licensor has licensed use of the mark to others and hopes to reject this licensing agreement in bankruptcy. Prior to the Supreme Court’s decision in Mission Prod. Holdings v. Tempnology, LLC, there was a circuit split regarding the licensee’s rights upon the bankruptcy of and rejection by the licensor. Some circuits held that the licensee’s rights …

Twitter, Parody, And The First Amendment: A Contextual Approach To Twitter Parody Defamation, Emma Lux

Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review

Twitter parody defamation cases raise novel questions about how to translate defamation law to Twitter’s interactive platform. What constitutes a “reasonable” reader on Twitter? What content is relevant to interpreting the meaning of a tweet from a parody account? The answers to these questions will have far-reaching effects for online speech. Parody authors are already vulnerable to defamation liability, particularly on Twitter where their statements often appear with very little context. Twitter parody accounts, which produce important political and social commentary, risk defamation lawsuits, as well as, in some states, criminal liability for online impersonation. This Note proposes a methodology …

A Human Rights Approach To Risk: The Case Of Human Germline Editing, Jessica Almqvist

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Foreward, Cesare P.R. Romano, Jessica Almqvist, Andrea Boggio, Timo Faltus, Kerry Lynn Macintosh, Scott J. Schweikart

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Medicinal Genome Editing In Germany – Tensions Between Safeguarding And Circumventing Ethical And Legal Standards, Timo Faltus

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Does Mitochondrial Replacement Therapy Violate Laws Against Human Cloning?, Kerry Lynn Macintosh

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Global Regulation Of Germline Genome Editing: Ethical Considerations And Application Of International Human Rights Law, Scott J. Schweikart

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Regulation Of Human Germline Genome Modification (Hggm) At The National Level: A Call For Comprehensive Legal Reform, Andrea Boggio, Cesare P.R. Romano, Jessica Almqvist

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Regulation Of Securities Offerings In California: Is It Time For A Change After A Century Of Merit Regulation?, Neal H. Brockmeyer

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The California securities law originated in 1913 from a populist movement that embodied a paternalistic attitude toward the protection of investors. It was characterized by the registration of offerings of securities with few exemptions and exclusions, a qualitative review of the merits of those offerings and an administrator with broad authority to implement and enforce the law. While the California securities law is still based on merit review, exclusions and exemptions have been added and expanded over the years by the California legislature and securities regulators. More recently, Congress has preempted state registration and merit review of various securities and …

Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act: Why California Courts Interpreted It Correctly And What That Says About How We Should Change It, E. Alex Murcia

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

In 1996, Congress passed the Communications Decency Act (CDA). In 1997, the United States Supreme Court struck down most of the CDA. However, section 230, which protects providers and users of interactive computer services from liability for defamatory content posted to their platforms by third parties, remains in effect. In the California and federal judicial systems, courts interpret section 230’s immunity provisions broadly—so that the statute conveys broad immunity. This Note argues that the broad application of section 230’s protections is consistent with the intent of the statute’s drafters. However, it also contends that (1) this interpretation of section 230 …

Forging A Path Towards Meaningful Digital Privacy: Data Monetization And The Ccpa, Rebecca Harris

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) was passed in response to a number of newsworthy data breaches with widespread impacts, and which revealed how little digital privacy consumers actually have. Despite the large market for consumer data, individual consumers generally do not earn money when their personal data are sold. Further, consumers have very little control over who collects their data, what information is collected, and with whom it is shared. To place control back in the hands of the consumer, affirmative consent should be required to collect and sell consumer’s data, and consumers should have the ability to sell …