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

Law Commons

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

University of Michigan Law School

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

1981

Trials

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Comparison Evidence In Obscenity Trials, Marguerite Munson Lentz Oct 1981

Comparison Evidence In Obscenity Trials, Marguerite Munson Lentz

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Article critiques the approach endorsed in Hamling, particularly regarding the Court's failure to consider how the presentation of proof in an obscenity trial affects the defendant's constitutional rights. The Article urges that relevant comparison evidence should be admissible despite the risk of confusion or the opportunity to present expert testimony, and furthermore, that a court should be required to make explicit its findings regarding the relevancy of comparison evidence. Part I of the Article demonstrates the constitutional significance to the obscenity defendant of evidence, particularly comparison exhibits, bearing on prevailing community standards. Part II considers the assessment of …


A Proposal For Apportioning Damages In Fair Representation Suits, Kenneth B. Mcclain Apr 1981

A Proposal For Apportioning Damages In Fair Representation Suits, Kenneth B. Mcclain

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Apportionment of damages in fair representation suits represents one of the most unsettled issues in labor law today. Although the Supreme Court has attempted to establish a single "governing principle" for apportioning damages, lower courts have read this principle as authorizing two divergent standards for apportionments. Part I of this article traces the evolution from the Court's original standard presented in Vaca v. Sipes through two subsequent applications of that standard: the Czosek v. O'Mara standard, which interpreted Vaca as placing the bulk of damages on the employer, and Justice Stewart's standard taken from his concurrence in Hines v. Anchor …