Law Commons^™

Divorce - Pendente Lite Awards - Counsel Fees - Costs - Alimony - Effect Of Equal Rights Amendment; Wiegand V. Wiegand, Joseph M. Donley

Akron Law Review

THE PENNSYLVANIA SUPERIOR COURT, in Wiegand v. Wiegand,struck out at one of the true bastions of sex discrimination incorporated into the Anglo-American legal system. The legislated discrimination of the Pennsylvania Divorce Law was the object of the court's scrutiny. Appellee Sara Wiegand had filed a complaint in divorce a mensa et thora, a petition for alimony, and an initial petition for alimony pendente lite, counsel fees, and expenses. On August 14, 1967, the Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County, ordered appellant Myron Wiegand to pay $875 per month alimony pendente lite and $250 preliminary counsel fees. Subsequently, appellee filed additional …

Standing; Assertion Of Jus Tertii; Sex Discrimination; Equal Protection; Twenty-First Amendment; Craig V. Boren, Anthony Sadowski

Akron Law Review

"A PPELLANTS brought an action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. The complaint charged that the operation of two Oklahoma statutes, which prohibited the sale of 3.2% beer to males under the age of 21 while allowing females over the age of 18 to purchase the commodity, violated the fourteenth amendment to the Federal Constitution. The three-judge court held that the gender-based classification did not violate the equal protection clause. In Craig v. Boren, on direct appeal, the United States Supreme Court reversed, finding that the gender-based classification could …

Title Vii Discrimination Actions: Applicable Or Inapplicable To The Partnership Decision? Hishon V. King & Spalding, Gus Yogmour

Akron Law Review

An underlying premise of a partnership is that it is a strictly voluntary association between two or more persons for a business purpose. The concept that a partnership can be forced against its will to accept another individual into the organization as a partner is repugnant to the underlying premise of voluntariness of association. One purpose of Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex and to place men and women on an equal footing. In order for this equal footing to exist, an individual's capabilities can be the only …

The Respective Burdens Of Proof In Title Vii Cases: Price Waterhouse V. Hopkins Confuses The Issue, Gregory T. Rossi

Akron Law Review

employed women, and other minorities throughout the United States. The opinion has several significant aspects. First, the case defines the respective evidentiary burdens of a plaintiff-employee and defendant-employer in a Title VIP suit, when the plaintiff-employee has shown that the defendant-employer's employment action resulted from a consideration of legitimate and illegitimate factors (i.e., "mixed motive case"). Second, the express allocation of the burdens of proof resolved a conflict among the various Courts of Appeals. Third, the Court failed to issue a majority opinion. This is significant in light of the current republican administration and its influence on what is now …

Justice Brennan's Gender Jurisprudence, Rebecca Korzec

Akron Law Review

However, less attention has been focused on Justice Brennan's dramatic impact on the Supreme Court's gender jurisprudence. More than any other member of the Court, Justice Brennan recognized the complexity and pervasiveness of sex discrimination and its costs to society as a whole. Brennan's opinions recognized that sex differentiation is largely cultural in origin, rather than based on "real" gender differences. As a result, Justice Brennan created a truly independent gender jurisprudence, eventually emerging as the architect of the Supreme Court's contemporary test for evaluating claims of sex-based discrimination.

Understanding the significance of Brennan's contribution requires an appreciation of the …