Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Scope Of Employer Liability For Employee Exposure To A Hazardous Substance: No Harm, No Foul? An Analysis Of Metro-North Commuter R.R. Co. V. Buckley, Barbara J. Fick
The Scope Of Employer Liability For Employee Exposure To A Hazardous Substance: No Harm, No Foul? An Analysis Of Metro-North Commuter R.R. Co. V. Buckley, Barbara J. Fick
Journal Articles
This article previews the Supreme Court case Metro-North Commuter R.R. Co. v. Buckley, 521 U.S. 424 (1997). The author expected the Court to decide whether a railroad worker who is covered by the Federal Employer's Liability Act who has been exposed to asbestos because of employer negligence but who has not developed an asbestos-related disease can recover damages for emotional distress caused by the exposure.
Hope And Despair For A New South Africa: The Limits Of Rights Discourse, Makau Wa Mutua
Hope And Despair For A New South Africa: The Limits Of Rights Discourse, Makau Wa Mutua
Journal Articles
This article is a critique of the struggle to end apartheid in South Africa. It explores the assumptions employed by the African National Congress and the international community to construct a post-apartheid society. It argues that the reliance on the law as the key medium for economic, social, and political change was insufficient to transform the legacy of apartheid. Instead, the piece contends that apartheid was privatized and its beneficiaries protected under the new dispensation. It makes the argument that the lot of the black majority is unlikely to be changed such gradualist approach to social change.
Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied: May A Prisoner's Challenge To Parole Revocation Be Delayed Until The Sentence Is Completed And Then Dismissed As Moot?, Jimmy Gurule
Journal Articles
A preview of Spencer v. Kemna, a 1997 Supreme Court case where a prison inmate challenged the revocation of his parole by the state of Missouri. This case is significant because the inmate initiated his challenge while in prison and continued it after he had served his sentence and was released. Substantial confusion exists in case law regarding whether such a challenge would be considered moot after the inmate had completed serving his or her sentence. At issue is if the “collateral consequences” rule applies to challenges against parole revocations. The Court has ruled that challenges by individuals against their …