Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Comparative and Foreign Law (767)
- Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law (452)
- Intellectual Property Law (403)
- Natural Resources Law (403)
- Constitutional Law (316)
-
- Environmental Law (273)
- Labor and Employment Law (247)
- Criminal Procedure (229)
- Torts (207)
- Property Law and Real Estate (192)
- International Law (186)
- Family Law (180)
- Civil Procedure (170)
- Legal Profession (166)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (159)
- Criminal Law (153)
- Administrative Law (152)
- Legal Education (151)
- Computer Law (149)
- Internet Law (143)
- Health Law and Policy (137)
- Business Organizations Law (134)
- State and Local Government Law (132)
- Courts (130)
- Commercial Law (121)
- Contracts (121)
- Legal Writing and Research (120)
- Privacy Law (120)
- Evidence (112)
- Keyword
-
- Privacy (31)
- Intellectual property (30)
- Community property (28)
- Copyright (28)
- Washington State (24)
-
- Discrimination (20)
- Fourth Amendment (20)
- Legal education (20)
- First Amendment (19)
- China (17)
- Contracts (16)
- Patents (16)
- Constitutional Law (15)
- Ethics (15)
- Human rights (15)
- Uniform Commercial Code (14)
- Tax (13)
- Washington (13)
- Criminal law (12)
- Technology (12)
- Artificial intelligence (11)
- Evidence (11)
- Innovation (11)
- Legal research (11)
- Taxation (11)
- Trademark (11)
- COVID-19 (10)
- E-commerce (10)
- International Law (10)
- Public trust doctrine (10)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Washington Law Review (3365)
- Articles (921)
- Washington International Law Journal (723)
- Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts (314)
- Washington Journal of Environmental Law & Policy (110)
-
- Court Briefs (70)
- Washington Law Review Online (64)
- Librarians' Articles (60)
- Alumni Magazines (39)
- Chapters in Books (32)
- Librarians' Chapters in Books (22)
- Washington Journal of Social & Environmental Justice (21)
- United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 to 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975)) (18)
- Tech Policy Lab (17)
- United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 96-35014, 96-35082, 96-35142, 96-35196, 96-35200, 96-35223 (135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998)) (17)
- Technology Law and Public Policy Clinic (16)
- Sohappy v. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976)) (14)
- Books (13)
- Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n, Docket Nos. 77-983, 78-119, 78-139 (443 U.S. 658 (1979)) (13)
- Presentations (12)
- Washington v. United States, Puget Sound Shellfish Growers v. United States, Alexander v. United States, 26 Tideland and Upland Private Property Owners v. United States, Docket Nos. 98-1028, 98-1026, 98-1039, 98-1052 (526 U.S. 1060 (1999)) (11)
- Book Reviews (10)
- Rule of Law Initiative (10)
- Selected Articles on Washington State Constitution History (10)
- United States v. Baker, Docket Nos. 80-1085, 80-1086, 80-1088, 80-1116, 80-1117, 80-1118, 80-1206, 80-1219, 80-1208, 80-1205, 80-1214 (641 F.2d 1311 (9th Cir. 1981)) (9)
- Puget Sound Gillnetters Ass'n v. Moos, Docket No. 44401 (88 Wash. 2d 677 (June 9, 1976)) (8)
- Selected Books and Theses (8)
- United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 07-35062, 07-35124, 07-35219 (573 F.3d 701 (9th Cir. 2009)) (8)
- Department of Game v. Puyallup Tribe, Inc., Docket No. 38611 (70 Wash. 2d 245 (Jan. 1967)) (7)
- Puget Sound Gillnetters Ass'n v. United States District Court, Docket Nos. 77-3129, 77-3208, 77-3209, 77-3654, 77-3655 (605 F.2d 492 (9th Cir. 1979)) (7)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 4471 - 4500 of 6131
Full-Text Articles in Law
Department Of Game And State Of Washington Reply To Appellees' Briefs - United States V. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 To 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 to 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
No abstract provided.
Reply Brief Of Appellants Dept. Of Fisheries And The State Of Washington - United States V. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 To 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 to 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
No abstract provided.
Reply Brief Of State Of Oregon - Sohappy V. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
Sohappy v. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
No abstract provided.
Appellee's Answering Brief - Sohappy V. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
Sohappy v. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
No abstract provided.
Brief For The United States - Sohappy V. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
Sohappy v. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
No abstract provided.
Separate Brief Of Puyallup Tribe - United States V. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 To 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 to 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
No abstract provided.
Brief For The United States - United States V. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 To 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 to 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Tribal Appellees - United States V. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 To 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 to 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
No abstract provided.
State Of Washington's Response To Plaintiff- Appellants' Brief In Cause Nos. 74-2438, 2705, 2606 - United States V. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 To 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 to 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
No abstract provided.
Answering Brief Of Intervenor-Appellant Northwest Steelheaders Council Of Trout Unlimited To Brief Of Appellant Indian Tribes - United States V. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 To 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 to 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
No abstract provided.
Appellants' Opening Brief - Sohappy V. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
Sohappy v. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Plaintiffs-Appellees Richard Sohappy - Sohappy V. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
Sohappy v. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Appellee Yakima Indian Nation - Sohappy V. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
Sohappy v. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Intervenor-Appellee The Confederated Tribes Of The War Springs Reservation Of Oregon - Sohappy V. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
Sohappy v. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Nez Perce Tribe Of Idaho - Sohappy V. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
Sohappy v. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Amicus Curiae State Of Oregon - United States V. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 To 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 to 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
No abstract provided.
Caveat Viator: The Duty To Wear Seat Belts Under Comparative Negligence Law, John A. Hoglund, A. Peter Parsons
Caveat Viator: The Duty To Wear Seat Belts Under Comparative Negligence Law, John A. Hoglund, A. Peter Parsons
Washington Law Review
The first portion of this article will attempt to show that neither judicial nor legislative reluctance, nor its underlying reasoning, is justifiable in light of the current state of law and society. Substantial evidence will be presented to demonstrate the need for our society to adopt the seat belt habit and for the law to recognize and respond to this societal need. Reactions of courts and legislative bodies to suggestions of mandated use are then explored as a preliminary to an analysis of the common law basis for adoption of the seat belt rule. A careful explanation will then be …
Recall In Washington: A Time For Reform, Michael L. Cohen
Recall In Washington: A Time For Reform, Michael L. Cohen
Washington Law Review
The purpose of this article is threefold: (1) to trace the history of recall in Washington, including the enactment of our present recall statutes and their fundamental principles; (2) to examine the reasons behind the apparent judicial retreat from those principles; and (3) to propose amendments to the present recall statutes to implement the constitutional intent.
Privacy And The Press Since Time, Inc. V. Hill, Don R. Pember, Dwight L. Teeter, Jr.
Privacy And The Press Since Time, Inc. V. Hill, Don R. Pember, Dwight L. Teeter, Jr.
Washington Law Review
In this article, the authors do not propose to discuss the innumerable ways in which one's privacy is invaded or to survey the entire sweep of the law of privacy, but rather attempt to trace briefly its development, with particular emphasis on how the law has affected the mass media since the Supreme Court decided its first privacy case, Time, Inc. v. Hill, in 1967. In so doing, we hope to add somewhat to the understanding of this unsettled area of law.
A Century Of Case Method: An Apologia, James M. Dente
A Century Of Case Method: An Apologia, James M. Dente
Washington Law Review
This article will review the case method and the alternatives from the viewpoint of a seasoned-practitioner-turned-law-teacher. I will examine some of the criticisms of the method and offer some observations not heretofore made in the debate. It is hoped that this may help law students better understand the wisdom behind the use of the much maligned case method, which is still used in one form or another by the vast majority of American law professors.
Disqualifying Federal District Judges Without Cause, Peter A. Galbraith
Disqualifying Federal District Judges Without Cause, Peter A. Galbraith
Washington Law Review
This Comment will examine the desirability of adopting a without cause disqualification procedure to allow either party to remove a federal district judge from a particular case. After a discussion of the need for disqualification mechanisms, existing procedures for removal, either from a particular case or from the bench entirely, are discussed. Proposals for change, especially the Bayh bills, are outlined and evaluated in light of the practical problems peculiar to the federal district courts. The Comment concludes that a procedure to disqualify federal district judges without cause, as contained in the Bayh bills, is sound and should be adopted. …
Civil Procedure—Environmental Class Actions: Economic Ramifications Of The Rule 23 Nonaggregation Doctrine—Zahn V. International Paper Co., 414 U.S 291 (1973), James C. Carmody
Civil Procedure—Environmental Class Actions: Economic Ramifications Of The Rule 23 Nonaggregation Doctrine—Zahn V. International Paper Co., 414 U.S 291 (1973), James C. Carmody
Washington Law Review
This note will examine the impact of Zahn v. International Paper Co. within the context of environmental litigation. It will briefly trace the history of the nonaggregation doctrine relied upon and reaffirmed by the Zahn majority, and describe the limitations imposed upon would-be federal plaintiffs by that doctrine. The note then will examine various alternative modes of adjudication, including the ancillary jurisdiction alternative suggested by dissenting Justice Brennan, which would have been preferable to the position adopted by the majority. Finally, and most importantly, the note will take a hard look at the deleterious economic effects of Zahn upon environmental …
Constitutional Law—Flag Misuse And The First Amendment—Spence V. Washington, 94 S. Ct. 2727 (1974), Michael W. Hoge
Constitutional Law—Flag Misuse And The First Amendment—Spence V. Washington, 94 S. Ct. 2727 (1974), Michael W. Hoge
Washington Law Review
Defendant Spence displayed an inverted American flag from his apartment window during the days following the Cambodian incursion and Kent State tragedy in 1970. Affixed to the flag was a peace symbol, formed with black tape. The Washington Supreme Court sustained a conviction for violation of Washington State's "improper use" statute. On appeal to the Supreme Court, reversed. Held: The statute, as applied to defendant's conduct, impermissibly infringed expression protected by the first amendment. Spence v. Washington, 94 S. Ct. 2727 (1974).
Constitutional Law—Eminent Domain—Just Compensation For A Lessee's Renewal Expectation—Almota Farmers Elevator & Warehouse Co. V. United States, 409 U.S. 470 (1973), Mark W. Pennak
Washington Law Review
The district court accepted Almota's theory of valuation, but was reversed by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Supreme Court reinstated the district court's judgment. Held: Just compensation for a leasehold bearing improvements owned by the lessee is measured by what a willing buyer would pay to a willing seller for the leasehold, taking into account the possibility of renewal. Almota Farmers Elevator & Warehouse Co. v. United States, 409 U.S. 470 (1973).
Constitutional Law—State May Not Require Filing Fee From Indigent Candidate As Prerequisite To Ballot Placement—Lubin V. Panish, 415 U.S. 709 (1974), Mary Mcinnis Schuman
Constitutional Law—State May Not Require Filing Fee From Indigent Candidate As Prerequisite To Ballot Placement—Lubin V. Panish, 415 U.S. 709 (1974), Mary Mcinnis Schuman
Washington Law Review
Petitioner Lubin desired to be placed on the ballot in the primary election for nomination to a position on the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. He was denied the papers requisite to ballot placement, however, because he was unable to pay the filing fee, a mandatory precondition to ballot placement in California. Although California statutes permit write-in votes, they are not counted unless the write-in candidate pays the filing fee prior to the election. Seeking invalidation of the statutes, Petitioner filed suit in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, alleging that he was a serious candidate who did not …
Appellants' Opening Brief - United States V. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 To 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 to 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Intervenor-Appellant Northwest Steelheaders Council Of Trout Unlimited - United States V. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 To 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 to 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
No abstract provided.
Opening Brief Of Appellants - Sohappy V. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
Sohappy v. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
No abstract provided.
Appellant State Of Washington Opening Brief - Sohappy V. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
Sohappy v. Smith, Nos. 74-2409, 74-2376, 74-2617 (529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. 1976))
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Defendant-Intervenor, Washington Reef Net Owners Association - United States V. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 To 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 74-2414, 74-2437 to 74-2440, 74-2567, 74-2602, 74-2705 (520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975))
No abstract provided.