Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Criminal Law (7)
- Criminal Procedure (7)
- Civil Procedure (4)
- Legal Biography (4)
- Constitutional Law (3)
-
- Legal Writing and Research (3)
- Property Law and Real Estate (3)
- Courts (2)
- Evidence (2)
- Family Law (2)
- First Amendment (2)
- Jurisdiction (2)
- Legislation (2)
- Tax Law (2)
- Torts (2)
- Administrative Law (1)
- Banking and Finance Law (1)
- Business Organizations Law (1)
- Civil Law (1)
- Consumer Protection Law (1)
- Judges (1)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (1)
- Legal Profession (1)
- Privacy Law (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- Keyword
-
- Katz v. United States (3)
- Mathews v. Eldridge (2)
- Robert I. Stevenson (2)
- Surratt v. Thompson (2)
- Terry v. Ohio (2)
-
- Tribute (2)
- United States v. Watson (2)
- A Case for Jury Determination of Search and Seizure Law (1)
- A Critique of Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining and Reclamation Association (1)
- A Re-examination of Sovereign Tort Immunity in Virginia (1)
- A Tribute to J. Westwood Smithers (1)
- ABA (1)
- APA (1)
- Administrative Procedure Act (1)
- Aichner v. Aichner (1)
- Alls v. Alls (1)
- American Motor Specialties Co. v. FTC (1)
- Arkenberg v. City of Topeka (1)
- Armstrong v. Armstrong (1)
- Arrowsmith v. Commissioner (1)
- Articles (1)
- Association of National Advertisers v. FTC (1)
- Author Index (1)
- Automatic Canteen Co. v. FTC (1)
- Beacon Theatres Inc. v. Westover (1)
- Beck v. Ohio (1)
- Bernstein v. Universal Pictures (1)
- Bill of Rights (1)
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the FederalBureau of Narcotic (1)
- Blake v. State (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 40
Full-Text Articles in Law
University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents
University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Scheduled Principal Prepayments: The Residential Mortgagor's Financial Response To Front-Ended Interest Charges, James E. Anderson
Scheduled Principal Prepayments: The Residential Mortgagor's Financial Response To Front-Ended Interest Charges, James E. Anderson
University of Richmond Law Review
In this era of double-digit inflation and high mortgage interest rates, many aspiring homeowners (as well as present homeowners) are searching for ways to mitigate the financial sting of skyrocketing housing costs. Prepayment of mortgage loan principal is a simple, little publicized, but completely legal technique which allows certain mortgagors to completely repay their mortgage loans, usually within half of the original loan period. This technique simultaneously trims thousands, and more often tens of thousands, of dollars from the interest charges the mortgagor would ordinarily pay under the terms of his mortgage note.
University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents
University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents
University of Richmond Law Review
This is Volume XVI of the University of Richmond Law Review.
Tribute: Robert I. Stevenson, B.J. Brabham
Tribute: Robert I. Stevenson, B.J. Brabham
University of Richmond Law Review
Professor Robert I. Stevenson must retire from teaching after this academic year. Students and faculty here at the University of Richmond Law School are saddened by the prospect. Many have gone to him personally, urging him to stay on for just one more year (hoping, without doubt, to see that "one more year" stretch into many more years). All have come away disappointed. Bob Stevenson believes that mandatory retirement, at least in this profession, is a good thing. He has seen too many excellent teachers, judges, and the like, continue on the job long after their excellence has vanished. And …
Dedication: Robert I. Stevenson
Dedication: Robert I. Stevenson
University of Richmond Law Review
Robert I. Stevenson will retire from his position as Professor of Law at the University of Richmond School of Law at the end of the 1981-82 academic year. Mr. Stevenson joined the faculty of T.C. Williams in 1974 and since that time has shared his knowledge, his wit and his perspective with countless students who by chance or design enrolled in his courses. To acknowledge our deep appreciation for the contribution which Mr. Stevenson has made to the quality of legal education at T. C. Williams and to express our sense of loss at his impending departure, the Editorial Board …
University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents
University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Corporate Attorney-Client Privilege - New Emphasis On The Lawyer's Need To Know: Upjohn Co. V. United States, Michael J. Viscount Jr.
Corporate Attorney-Client Privilege - New Emphasis On The Lawyer's Need To Know: Upjohn Co. V. United States, Michael J. Viscount Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
In seeking the advice of legal counsel, the corporation may, out of necessity, communicate through its representatives confidential secrets about its conduct in business. As is the case with individuals, it is well settled that a corporation may avail itself of the evidentiary privilege which allows concealment of such confidential communications. This so-called attorney-client privilege is the oldest of the privileges for confidential communications known to the common law. However, its application in the corporate context has been quite unpredictable for the past twenty years.
Postconviction Remedies, And Federal Jurisdiction: Tensions In The Allocation Of Judicial Power, Robert Popper, William B. De Meza
Postconviction Remedies, And Federal Jurisdiction: Tensions In The Allocation Of Judicial Power, Robert Popper, William B. De Meza
University of Richmond Law Review
Postconviction Remedies deals with a subject of great importance to the practitioner of criminal law. It is concerned with the procedures available to persons who seek relief from their convictions after trial and after direct review in the appellate courts. Though not usually a part of the law school curriculum and therefore not part of the attorney's formal training, the intricacies of postconviction remedies must be mastered by the lawyer who wishes to render skillful service to the convicted client. The trial and appeal are important battles, but others remain to be fought which can decide crucial issues seriously affecting …
A Tribute To J. Westwood Smithers, Robert R. Merhige Jr.
A Tribute To J. Westwood Smithers, Robert R. Merhige Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
The Editorial Board of the University of Richmond Law Review respectfully dedicates this issue to the memory of J. Westwood Smithers, 1909-1981, member of the Law Faculty for thirty years and the first editor of the University of Richmond Law Notes, from which the University of Richmond Law Review developed.
University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents
University Of Richmond Law Review Table Of Contents
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Equity Insolvency And The New Model Business Corporation Act, Daniel T. Murphy
Equity Insolvency And The New Model Business Corporation Act, Daniel T. Murphy
University of Richmond Law Review
One consequence of the recent and far-reaching revisions to the financial provisions of the Model Business Corporation Act (hereafter the "Model Act") is to re-focus attention on the significance of the elusive concept of equity insolvency as it affects corporate distributions.
Conditional Zoning In Virginia, Frank O. Brown Jr., Susanne L. Shilling
Conditional Zoning In Virginia, Frank O. Brown Jr., Susanne L. Shilling
University of Richmond Law Review
Zoning ordinances in the United States are of relatively recent origin. Local government planners were quick to recognize their usefulness as a means of land use control, and over the years zoning ordinances have been developed into many varied and complex forms. This article will focus on conditional zoning, one of the newest forms of zoning, as it exists today in Virginia. Some background on zoning in general, however, will be useful to achieve a proper understanding of conditional zoning.
Discovery Of Penalties, W. Hamilton Bryson
Discovery Of Penalties, W. Hamilton Bryson
University of Richmond Law Review
It is a well-established and fundamental principle of justice that no one may be compelled to subject himself to punishments nor to give evidence leading to that result. Nemo tenetur prodere seipsum is an ancient maxim. It was written directly into the Virginia Declaration of Rights in 1776, which states that in all "criminal prosecutions" no one can "be compelled to give evidence against himself." This idea was also incorporated into the United States Constitution in 1791 through the fifth amendment.
A Re-Examination Of Sovereign Tort Immunity In Virginia, Edward W. Taylor
A Re-Examination Of Sovereign Tort Immunity In Virginia, Edward W. Taylor
University of Richmond Law Review
In a hair splitting decision on June 5, 1980, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled in James v. Jane, that attending physicians at the University of Virginia Hospital are not immune from tort liability but affirmed that the state, interns and residents of state hospitals, and employees of the state still enjoy tort immunity. The court made a distinction between the sovereign Commonwealth of Virginia and its employees, and a governmental agency created by the Commonwealth and its employees. However, apparently not all state employees are immune; and not all employees of state agencies are subject to tort liability.
When Cops Are Robbers-Municipal Liability For Police Misconduct Under Section 1983 And Bivens, Brenda D. Crocker
When Cops Are Robbers-Municipal Liability For Police Misconduct Under Section 1983 And Bivens, Brenda D. Crocker
University of Richmond Law Review
Municipalities faced with rising crime rates, tighter budgets and an increasingly vocal populace often are pressed to make policy decisions which sacrifice important interests. When fiscal considerations predominate, there arises the danger that local police departments will be unable to fulfill their duty to ensure order in society without disturbing citizens' enjoyment of their civil rights. Until recently, improperly trained, supervised or disciplined police of- ficers merely subjected municipalities to embarrassment. However, with increasing success, citizens are arguing that they should be awarded damages against the municipality in every case where their civil rights have been deprived through police misconduct. …
Rhode Island V. Innis: A Workable Definition Of "Interrogation"?, Deborah L. Fletcher
Rhode Island V. Innis: A Workable Definition Of "Interrogation"?, Deborah L. Fletcher
University of Richmond Law Review
In Rhode Island v. Innis, the Supreme Court addressed for the first time the issue of what constitutes interrogation under Miranda v. Arizona. Innis is a significant decision in the criminal procedure area not only because of the workable standard for determining "interrogation" which it sets forth, but also because it signals the Burger Court's decision not to overrule Mirandaor to further disparage its effectiveness. However, Innis by no means represents a return to the Warren Court's solicitous approach to a suspect's Miranda rights. The Burger Court still has not raised Miranda's protections and strictures to the status of constitutionally …
Overview Of Virginia Supreme Court Cases On Domestic Relations: 1970-1980, Peter N. Pross
Overview Of Virginia Supreme Court Cases On Domestic Relations: 1970-1980, Peter N. Pross
University of Richmond Law Review
The Supreme Court of Virginia examined a variety of domestic relations problems and issues during the last decade. Most of the court's decisions involved divorce issues such as jurisdiction, alimony or support and maintenance, and child custody or support orders. However, the court also decided cases on annulment, the enforcement of support and maintenance decrees, legitimacy and paternity, adoption, name changes and intrafamily tort immunity.
The New Warrant Requirements: Payton V. New York And Wallace V. King, Robert B. Lloyd Jr.
The New Warrant Requirements: Payton V. New York And Wallace V. King, Robert B. Lloyd Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
Since the original Bill of Rights was drafted, the diverse warrant requirements necessary for reasonable searches and seizures under the fourth amendment have led to chaos and confusion. A dichotomy has existed between the requirements necessary for the search and seizure of property and those necessary for the search and seizure of persons. Generally, a warrant has been required when the object of the search and seizure was property while no warrant has been necessary for the seizure of an individual. The Supreme Court decision in Payton v. New York has erased much of this distinction, holding that the fourth …
Challenging Rezoning In Virginia, William F. Neely
Challenging Rezoning In Virginia, William F. Neely
University of Richmond Law Review
Zoning is an intrusion into our everyday lives, regulating a right basic to most Americans-the free use of their land. As municipalities increase their use of the zoning mechanism, more landowners will find the use of their lands restricted and in turn will seek legal counsel in order to challenge the restrictions. Presently, when faced with a rezoning question, a practitioner has to filter through the many treatises, articles and cases in an attempt to pull together Virginia law. It is the purpose of this comment to compile Virginia rezoning law in order to serve as a reference for the …
Capital Expenditures: A Result In Search Of A Rationale, John W. Lee, Nina R. Murphy
Capital Expenditures: A Result In Search Of A Rationale, John W. Lee, Nina R. Murphy
University of Richmond Law Review
A business may reduce its gross income by its expenses to arrive at taxable income; however, not all money paid out by a business during its tax year is deductible in that year. The distinction between business expenses which are deductible under section 1622 and capital expenditures which are not currently deductible under section 2633 is probably the most difficult one to discern in the entire area of business deductions, principally because so many disparate elements are encompassed within the capital expenditure doctrine.
Discovery And The Privacy Act: Exemption (B)(11) To The Conditions Of Disclosure: What Qualifies As An "Order Of The Court"?, John W. Williams
Discovery And The Privacy Act: Exemption (B)(11) To The Conditions Of Disclosure: What Qualifies As An "Order Of The Court"?, John W. Williams
University of Richmond Law Review
On December 31, 1974, President Gerald Ford signed the landmark Privacy Act of 1974 into law. One of the key concepts of the Act is the principle of disclosure limitation, which limits the ability of the federal government to disclose the contents of per- sonal records in its possession. In the words of the Senate Governmental Operations Committee, this principle "is designed to pre- vent.., the wrongful disclosure and use of personal files held by Federal agencies."
Buyer Liability Under Section 2(F) Of The Robinson-Patman Act, Douglas E. Ray
Buyer Liability Under Section 2(F) Of The Robinson-Patman Act, Douglas E. Ray
University of Richmond Law Review
Despite the fact that the 1936 Robinson-Patman Act amendments to the Clayton Act were enacted in an attempt to curb the ability of large businesses to coerce sellers of products into granting them discriminatory price advantages over smaller purchasers, only one section of the Act, section 2(f) which prohibits the knowing inducement or receipt of discriminatory prices, is aimed at buyers. The remainder of the Act is directed toward sellers. Liability under section 2(f) is generally derivative in nature, being based on a preliminary finding of seller liability under another section of the Act. Because of this derivative nature of …
Criminal Procedure And Criminal Law: Virginia Supreme Court Decisions During The 70'S, Michael J. Barbour, Thomas E. Carr, Sarah H. Finley, Jeannie L. Pilant
Criminal Procedure And Criminal Law: Virginia Supreme Court Decisions During The 70'S, Michael J. Barbour, Thomas E. Carr, Sarah H. Finley, Jeannie L. Pilant
University of Richmond Law Review
The purpose of this note is to examine the decisions of the Virginia Supreme Court during the period between 1970-1980 in the area of criminal procedure and substantive criminal law. Legislative changes will not be dealt with in depth except as they have affected these decisions. Because of space constraints, a complete review of all areas is impossible; therefore, review has been limited to those issues most likely to be of interest to the practicing attorney. The discussion will also attempt to establish the position of the Virginia Supreme Court on these matters in relation to the United States Supreme …
Transforming The Privately Owned Shopping Center Into A Public Forum: Pruneyard Shopping Center V. Robins, James M. Mccauley
Transforming The Privately Owned Shopping Center Into A Public Forum: Pruneyard Shopping Center V. Robins, James M. Mccauley
University of Richmond Law Review
A recent Supreme Court decision has affirmed a state's choice to provide its citizens access to privately owned shopping centers for the purpose of exercising free speech and petition rights. The United States Supreme Court in Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins held that state consitutional provisions permitting individuals to exercise free speech and petition rights on private shopping center property do not violate the shopping center owner's property rights under the fifth and fourteenth amendments or his free speech rights under the first and fourteenth amendments. There exists a delicate balance between the competing in- terests of the shopping center …
Counter Revolution In The Federal Courts Of Appeal - The Aftermath Of Vermont Yankee, Jon A. Mueller
Counter Revolution In The Federal Courts Of Appeal - The Aftermath Of Vermont Yankee, Jon A. Mueller
University of Richmond Law Review
In recent years, there has been growing judicial concern about the fairness of action by administrative agencies and the ability of courts to effectively review this action. This concern stems from the increased use of informal procedures by agencies promulgating rules or orders, to accomplish the congressional objectives set out in their substantive statutes. In response, certain federal courts of appeal have begun to impose upon these agencies more procedural safeguards than are required by either the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) or substantive statutes. These judicially imposed safeguards are more commonly known as hybrid procedures.
Public Access To Criminal Trials: Richmond Newspapers, Inc. V. Virginia, Christopher C. Spencer
Public Access To Criminal Trials: Richmond Newspapers, Inc. V. Virginia, Christopher C. Spencer
University of Richmond Law Review
Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia is, in the words of Justice Stevens, a "watershed case." For the first time, the Court recognized that some sort of first amendment right of access to government proceedings exists. The Court, in a plurality opinion (joined by two Justices, accompanied by five concurring opinions and one dissent), held that the right of the public to attend criminal trials is "implicit in the guarantees of the First Amendment."
The Business Purpose Test In Section 355 Distributions: Major Pitfalls For Close Corporation Planning, Brenda D. Crocker
The Business Purpose Test In Section 355 Distributions: Major Pitfalls For Close Corporation Planning, Brenda D. Crocker
University of Richmond Law Review
Since 1918, Congress has recognized the economic necessity of stimulating growth in the business sector by encouraging productive corporate divisions. The unhappy task of more than sixty years has been to draft a statute which maximizes flexibility while precluding tax avoidance abuses. Charting its way by piecemeal legislation, Congress appears to have intended tax-free treatment for stock distributions pursuant to corporate divisions motivated by reasonable business needs. Curiously, although Congress clearly has assumed that a valid business purpose must be the primary motivation for such transactions, it never has expressly addressed the matter by statute. Instead, it has devised numerous …
A Case For Jury Determination Of Search And Seizure Law, Ronald J. Bacigal
A Case For Jury Determination Of Search And Seizure Law, Ronald J. Bacigal
University of Richmond Law Review
In a criminal case the option to return a general verdict of acquittal invests the jury with the raw power to nullify many legal determinations, including the trial judge's ruling that a search is constitutional. While courts grudingly acknowledge the existence of an extra-legal jury nullification power, courts do not recognize any jury prerogative to determine the lawfulness of a search. The United States Supreme Court's discussion of the jury's role in interpreting and applying the fourth amendment consists of one terse statement that the legality of a search "is a question of fact and law for the court and …
Techniques Of Legal Drafting: A Survival Manual, Peter Nash Swisher
Techniques Of Legal Drafting: A Survival Manual, Peter Nash Swisher
University of Richmond Law Review
The charge that we lawyers cannot write plain English is often supported by the quality of our legal documents. Legal drafting has aspects of complexity and precision not found in the great bulk of writing with which pre-law students are familar. Yet the traditional apprentice method for training competent legal draftsmen has failed "either because the typical young lawyer has been apprenticed to the wrong master or because the law schools have been unable to provide enough competent ones." This lack of a proper emphasis on legal drafting skills in America is demonstrated by the fact that of the four …
Non-Jury Trial Of Civil Litigation: Justifying A Complexity Exception To The Seventh Amendment, Barrett E. Pope
Non-Jury Trial Of Civil Litigation: Justifying A Complexity Exception To The Seventh Amendment, Barrett E. Pope
University of Richmond Law Review
The seventh amendment to the United States Constitution states that "[i]n Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved."' When Congress enacted the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the right to jury trial at common law remained undisturbed.