Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (309)
- Torts (261)
- Criminal Law (235)
- Labor and Employment Law (194)
- Property Law and Real Estate (173)
-
- Commercial Law (161)
- Tax Law (157)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (156)
- Securities Law (144)
- Business Organizations Law (133)
- Evidence (132)
- First Amendment (124)
- Intellectual Property Law (122)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (120)
- Law and Society (118)
- Supreme Court of the United States (114)
- Courts (108)
- State and Local Government Law (102)
- Contracts (98)
- Jurisprudence (95)
- Health Law and Policy (90)
- Bankruptcy Law (85)
- Administrative Law (80)
- Family Law (73)
- Insurance Law (73)
- Legal Profession (68)
- Estates and Trusts (67)
- Conflict of Laws (65)
- Environmental Law (64)
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional law (191)
- Criminal law (109)
- Due process (89)
- Evidence (84)
- Liability (72)
-
- Negligence (72)
- Torts (71)
- Civil rights (69)
- Antitrust (68)
- Conflict of laws (65)
- First amendment (62)
- Supreme Court (56)
- Property (54)
- Bankruptcy (52)
- Labor law (50)
- Federalism (47)
- Taxation (47)
- Administrative law (46)
- Jurisprudence (43)
- Contracts (42)
- Common law (41)
- Litigation (38)
- Arbitration (34)
- Corporate law (31)
- First Amendment (31)
- Insurance (31)
- Intellectual property (31)
- Jurisdiction (31)
- Regulation (30)
- Copyright (29)
- Publication Year
Articles 391 - 420 of 3653
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Structural Implications Of Inventors' Disclosure Obligations, Kevin E. Collins
The Structural Implications Of Inventors' Disclosure Obligations, Kevin E. Collins
Vanderbilt Law Review
Disclosure theory posits that inventors must disclose knowledge about their inventions and make that knowledge freely available for certain uses during the term of a patent as part of the price that they pay for their exclusive patent rights. This Article identifies an overlooked implication of this disclosure obligation. The availability of disclosed knowledge itself for free public use during the term of a patent means that there must be limits on inventors' rights: inventors must not be allowed to transform the use of disclosed knowledge itself into infringement through strategic claiming. If they could, inventors would, oddly, be able …
Symposium: The Disclosure Function Of The Patent System, Sean B. Seymore
Symposium: The Disclosure Function Of The Patent System, Sean B. Seymore
Vanderbilt Law Review
A fundamental goal of the patent system is to encourage the dissemination of technical knowledge.' The patent system achieves this goal through a quid pro quo-in exchange for the right to exclude, the inventor must fully disclose the technical details of the invention. As soon as a patent document publishes, there is hope that the public will use the technical details disclosed therein to improve upon the invention, to design around it, or to engage in other innovative activities. So while the patentee maintains the right to exclude others from practicing the invention until the patent expires, the technical information …
Physicalism And Patent Theory, Christopher A. Cotropia
Physicalism And Patent Theory, Christopher A. Cotropia
Vanderbilt Law Review
United States patent law's view on the need for a physical embodiment of the invention, and the continued production and use of an embodiment, has varied over the last two centuries. In the early days, the requirement for 'physicalism" was high, with the inventor being required to actually reduce the invention to practice prior to patenting, and enforceability was tied to "working" the claimed invention. By the early 1900s, these requirements of physicalism disappeared. This changing view on physicalism speaks volumes as to which major patent theory the law emphasizes, with physicalism supporting the incentive to invent theory and the …
Pierson, Peer Review, And Patent Law, Lisa L. Ouellette
Pierson, Peer Review, And Patent Law, Lisa L. Ouellette
Vanderbilt Law Review
When has a researcher done enough to merit a patent? Should the patent belong to the researcher who first suggests an invention or the one who brings it to fruition? The canonical dispute over a fox in Pierson v. Post is used to illustrate the competing policy considerations in deciding when to award a new property right, including providing efficient incentives, setting forth clear rules to guide future behavior, and respecting natural rights. In patent law, all of these considerations suggest that in practice, many patents are awarded too early, before an applicant has demonstrated that the invention is likely …
The Doctrinal Structure Of Patent Law's Enablement Requirement, Jason Rantanen
The Doctrinal Structure Of Patent Law's Enablement Requirement, Jason Rantanen
Vanderbilt Law Review
This Article examines the formal law of enablement, focusing on a perceived split in the enablement doctrine: whether disclosure of a single mode of an invention is necessarily sufficient to satisfy the requirement of enablement or whether the full scope of the claim must be enabled. In examining this split, this Article articulates the enablement inquiry in conceptual terms, identifying two elements of the courts' analyses that are implicit in every enablement determination: the nature of enablement disputes, as challenges and the articulation of a target or targets that must be enabled. , With this understanding in mind, the "full …
I See Dead People: Examining The Admissibility Of Living-Victim Photographs In Murder Trials, Susanna Rychlak
I See Dead People: Examining The Admissibility Of Living-Victim Photographs In Murder Trials, Susanna Rychlak
Vanderbilt Law Review
In the summer of 2015, the Tennessee legislature debated and passed the "Victim Life Photo Act," which went into effect on July 1, 2015. This law states: "In a prosecution for any criminal homicide, an appropriate photograph of the victim while alive shall be admissible evidence when offered by the district attorney general to show the general appearance and condition of the victim while alive." Victims' rights groups lobbied for this and similar laws throughout the country, which were then enacted by state legislatures. Though these laws amended rules of evidence, the considerations under which they were passed were largely …
The Customer Is Not Always Right: Balancing Worker And Customer Welfare In Antitrust Law, Clayton J. Masterman
The Customer Is Not Always Right: Balancing Worker And Customer Welfare In Antitrust Law, Clayton J. Masterman
Vanderbilt Law Review
This Note analyzes how courts' leniency affects a particular category of anticompetitive buyer conduct: agreements between employers that restrict competition in labor markets. If, as courts and commentators generally agree, the goal of antitrust law is to promote the welfare of consumers, how should courts balance the welfare of workers and customers under antitrust analysis? Arguably, worker welfare should be included in consumer welfare. If so, anticompetitive agreements between employers benefit one subset of consumers (customers), while hurting another subset (workers). The persistent procustomer and antiworker effect of such complicates a court's choice to find conduct per se unreasonable or …
Agencies' Obligation To Interpret The Statute, Aaron Saiger
Agencies' Obligation To Interpret The Statute, Aaron Saiger
Vanderbilt Law Review
Conventionally, when a statute delegates authority to an agency, courts defer to agency interpretations of that statute. Most agencies and scholars view such deference as a grant of permission to the agency to adopt any reasonable interpretation. That is wrong, jurisprudentially and ethically. An agency that commands deference bears a duty to adopt what it believes to be the best interpretation of the relevant statute. Deference assigns to the agency, rather than to a court, power authoritatively to declare what the law is. That power carries with it a duty to give the statute the best reading the agency can. …
Normalizing "Erie", Suzanna Sherry
Normalizing "Erie", Suzanna Sherry
Vanderbilt Law Review
This Article argues that the Erie doctrine should be normalized by bringing it into line with ordinary doctrines of federalism. Under ordinary federalism doctrines-such as the dormant commerce clause, implied preemption, federal preclusion law, and certain special "enclaves" of federal common law courts will displace state law to protect federal interests even when neither Congress nor the Constitution clearly articulates those interests. But under the Eric doctrine, the Supreme Court has mandated exactly the opposite approach: state law trumps federal interests unless those interests have been legislatively codified. This striking anomaly has not been noticed, in part because the voluminous …
Tribute: Elizabeth Chitwood, Jessica L. Haushalter
Tribute: Elizabeth Chitwood, Jessica L. Haushalter
Vanderbilt Law Review
Elizabeth "Beth" Chitwood was one of the newest members of the Vanderbilt Law Review. Our community mourns her unexpected loss and is grateful for the time we were able to share with her. The following Tribute briefly highlights Beth's contributions to the Vanderbilt Law community and the Vanderbilt Law Review.
Supreme Court Repeaters, Jason Iuliano, Ya Sheng Lin
Supreme Court Repeaters, Jason Iuliano, Ya Sheng Lin
Vanderbilt Law Review
A case that receives cert once is special. A case that receives cert twice is truly exceptional. This Article is the first to examine the phenomenon of "Supreme Court Repeaters." Although Repeaters may seem like mere curiosities, they are actually a valuable part of the Supreme Court's docket. Our analysis reveals that the Justices use Repeaters in three ways: (1) to set up important substantive questions that could not be addressed on the first pass, (2) to supervise lower courts, and (3) to address different substantive issues that arise at distinct points in litigation. In this Article, we investigate Supreme …
The Failed Superiority Experiment, Christine P. Bartholomew
The Failed Superiority Experiment, Christine P. Bartholomew
Vanderbilt Law Review
Federal law requires a class action be "supcrior to alternative methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating the controversy." This superiority requirement has gone unstudied, despite existing for half a century. Thia Article undertakes a comprehensive review of the superiority case law. It reveals a jurisprudence riddled with inconsistency as courts adopt diametrically opposed interpretations of the requirement. Originally crafted to encourage predictable, consistent class action decisions, superiority has mutated over the years into a dangerous wild card-subjectively used to stymie aggregate litigation. The solution is not adding a new requirement to the already onerous rules for class certification. Instead, judges …
Introduction: Is The Supreme Court Failing At Its Job, Or Are We Failing At Ours?, Suzanna Sherry
Introduction: Is The Supreme Court Failing At Its Job, Or Are We Failing At Ours?, Suzanna Sherry
Vanderbilt Law Review
It is a pleasure and a privilege to write an introduction to this Symposium celebrating Dean Erwin Chemerinsky's important new book, The Case Against the Supreme Court. Chemerinsky is one of the leading constitutional scholars of our time and a frequent advocate before the U.S. Supreme Court. If he thinks there is a case to be made against the Court, we should all take it very seriously indeed. Chemerinsky's thesis may be stated in a few sentences. The primary role of the Supreme Court, in his view, is to "protect the rights of minorities who cannot rely on the political …
Letter To Supreme Court (Erwin Chemerinsky Is Mad. Why You Should Care), Barry Friedman
Letter To Supreme Court (Erwin Chemerinsky Is Mad. Why You Should Care), Barry Friedman
Vanderbilt Law Review
Whatever else you want to say about Erwin Chemerinsky, he's sincere. Chemerinsky is nothing if not sincere. As anyone who knows him will tell you so. And Chemerinsky is in pain. He informs us: "This book was far harder to write than I could have imagined." The question is why Chemerinsky is in pain? You'd think this would be the easiest thing in the world for him, going after a Court he sees as overly conservative. Like shooting fish in a barrel. The reason is because deep in his heart-despite his beefs with the outcomes of cases-Chemerinsky has always been …
Three Supreme Court "Failures" And A Story Of Supreme Court Success, Corinna B. Lain
Three Supreme Court "Failures" And A Story Of Supreme Court Success, Corinna B. Lain
Vanderbilt Law Review
The Supreme Court is not the institution that I once revered," writes Erwin Chemerinsky in The Case Against the Supreme Court-a provocative, important work that also happens to be a great read. Chemerinsky's claim is that the Supreme Court ought to be protecting vulnerable minorities from repressive majorities, but it has not done so. "The Court has frequently failed, throughout American history, at its most important tasks, at its most important moments," he argues.' This is Chemerinsky's case against the Supreme Court, and it is a sweeping indictment. Of the cases Chemerinsky cites to prove his point, three stand out …
Thinking About The Supreme Court's Successes And Failures, Erwin Chemerinsky
Thinking About The Supreme Court's Successes And Failures, Erwin Chemerinsky
Vanderbilt Law Review
The Supreme Court often has failed at its most important tasks and at the most important times. I set out this thesis at the beginning the book:
To be clear, I am not saying that the Supreme Court has failed at these crucial tasks every time. Making a case against the Supreme Court does not require taking such an extreme position. I also will talk about areas where the Court has succeeded in protecting minorities and in enforcing the limits of the Constitution. My claim is that the Court has often failed where and when it has been most needed. …
The Supreme Court In Context: Conceptual, Pragmatic, And Institutional, Edward L. Rubin
The Supreme Court In Context: Conceptual, Pragmatic, And Institutional, Edward L. Rubin
Vanderbilt Law Review
Is it possible to decide whether a constitutional decision is right or wrong? Legal scholars respond with an enthusiastic 'Yes!" but their reasons for this answer are generally based on what philosophers call formal arguments. These arguments, as opposed to substantive arguments, focus on internal coherence, rather than external standards. Originalism, textualism, structural analysis, and evolving meaning are all formal arguments. Their appeal lies precisely in their independence from external issues-that is, from the sort of issues that generate political and social controversy. If one can demonstrate by formal argument that a particular constitutional decision is correct, then one can …
A Tribute To Justice Scalia: Why Bad Cases Make Bad Methodology, Brian T. Fitzpatrick
A Tribute To Justice Scalia: Why Bad Cases Make Bad Methodology, Brian T. Fitzpatrick
Vanderbilt Law Review
The Vanderbilt Law Review asked me to write a short memorial tribute to my old boss, Justice Antonin Scalia, and I am fortunate that Dean Chemerinsky's new book provides an apt occasion to do so. To be as blunt as the Justice would have been: he would have hated this book. Not because Dean Chemerinsky is not a gifted writer; he most surely is. But because the entire methodology of the book-a methodology I call "bad-cases" reasoning-was anathema to the Justice. The Justice may not have been right about everything, but he was right about this: bad-cases reasoning is bad …
Rethinking Judicial Minimalism: Abortion Politics, Party Polarization, And The Consequences Of Returning The Constitution To Elected Government, Neal Devins
Vanderbilt Law Review
This Article will argue that now is the time for the Court to decisively intervene in the abortion controversy by issuing a maximalist Roe-like decision; today's politics do not support an indeterminate standard like Casey's undue burden test. In other words, assuming that there is a constitutional right to abortion, today's Court should assume the heroic role Erwin Chemerinsky embraces in The Case Against the Supreme Court and other writings; specifically, the Court should "protect the rights of minorities who cannot rely on the political process." For Chemerinsky, protecting the rights of minorities is the "primary reason for having a …
The Broken-Hearted Lover: Erwin Chemerinsky's Romantic Longings For A Mythical Court, Gerald N. Rosenberg
The Broken-Hearted Lover: Erwin Chemerinsky's Romantic Longings For A Mythical Court, Gerald N. Rosenberg
Vanderbilt Law Review
Erwin Chemerinsky is broken hearted. "Almost forty years ago," he writes, "I decided to go to law school because I believed that law was the most powerful tool for social change and that the Supreme Court was the primary institution in society that existed to stop discrimination and to protect people's rights.' Smitten by the Court, Chemerinsky was blind to its historical role as a protector of privilege, and its structural limitations as an agent of progressive social change. Placing the Court on a pedestal, he abstracted it from the culture and the society in which it operates. For decades …
The Post-Riley Search Warrant: Search Protocols And Particularity In Cell Phone Searches, Adam M. Gershowitz
The Post-Riley Search Warrant: Search Protocols And Particularity In Cell Phone Searches, Adam M. Gershowitz
Vanderbilt Law Review
Last year, in Riley v. California, the Supreme Court required police to procure a warrant before searching a cell phone. Unfortunately, the Court's assumption that requiring search warrants would be "simple" and very protective of privacy was overly optimistic. This article reviews lower court decisions in the year since Riley and finds that the search warrant requirement is far less protective than expected. Rather than restricting search warrants to the narrow evidence being sought, some magistrates have issued expansive warrants authorizing a search of the entire contents of the phone with no restrictions whatsoever. Other courts have authorized searches of …
Bruton On Balance: Standardizing Redacted Codefendant Confessions Through Federal Rule Of Evidence 403, Margaret Dodson
Bruton On Balance: Standardizing Redacted Codefendant Confessions Through Federal Rule Of Evidence 403, Margaret Dodson
Vanderbilt Law Review
Joint criminal trials are a relatively common practice in the American criminal justice system. When multiple criminal defendants are charged in a single crime-especially in conspiracy cases-courts and prosecutors alike favor joint trials because of their comparable efficiency to individual trials. However, joint trials can raise significant procedural and constitutional concerns for codefendants. One such issue arises when the government seeks to introduce the confession of a non-testifying defendant (hereinafter a "declarantdefendant") that inculpates other codefendants.
When introduced, such confessions raise potential Sixth Amendment issues under Bruton v. United States. A Bruton violation occurs in a joint trial when a …
Finding "Tapia Error": How Circuit Courts Have Misread 'Tapia V. United States' And Shortchanged The Penological Goals Of The Sentencing Reform Act, Matt J. Gornick
Finding "Tapia Error": How Circuit Courts Have Misread 'Tapia V. United States' And Shortchanged The Penological Goals Of The Sentencing Reform Act, Matt J. Gornick
Vanderbilt Law Review
The American criminal justice system is called many things; "compassionate" is usually not one of them. Yet in the course of federal criminal proceedings, a sentencing hearing allows a judge to convey compassion toward a defendant, if only to say, "I'm sorry about your situation, but this is how I must apply the law." Likewise, a defendant might throw herself on the mercy of the court in hopes that the judge exercises discretion compassionately. Mitigating factors and downward departures suggest that judges are capable of doing so. But how does a sentencing judge show compassion, as opposed to simply feeling …
How To Assert State Sovereign Immunity Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Calvin Cohen
How To Assert State Sovereign Immunity Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Calvin Cohen
Vanderbilt Law Review
Twenty years have passed since the Supreme Court announced dramatic changes to the doctrine of state sovereign immunity in Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida.' This doctrine prevents "suits by private parties against unconsenting States" in recognition of the state's power to govern itself and its citizens freely, as well as the financial impact lawsuits have on the state's treasury. Since Seminole Tribe, the Supreme Court has-in a series of contentious 5-4 decisions-increasingly allowed this doctrine to immunize states and their officers from suits arising under the federal laws and sometimes even the Constitution. But while the Court has expanded …
Constitutionalizing Corporate Law, Elizabeth Pollman
Constitutionalizing Corporate Law, Elizabeth Pollman
Vanderbilt Law Review
The Supreme Court has recently decided some of the most important and controversial cases involving the federal rights of corporations in over two hundred years of jurisprudence. In rulings ranging from corporate political spending to religious liberty rights, the Court has dramatically expanded the zone in which corporations can act free from regulation. This Article argues these decisions represent a doctrinal shift, even from previous cases granting rights to corporations. The modern corporate rights doctrine has put unprecedented weight on state corporate law to act as a mechanism for resolving disputes among corporate participants regarding the expressive and religious activity …
Intrafirm Monitoring Of Executive Compensation, Robert J. Rhee
Intrafirm Monitoring Of Executive Compensation, Robert J. Rhee
Vanderbilt Law Review
This Article argues that employees should serve as intrafirm monitors of executive performance and pay. Employees and shareholders, labor and capital, can monitor executive performance and pay at different levels. Diffuse, diversified, and short durational shareholders currently monitor performance and pay through the market mechanism of public disclosures and share price. Employees can add an effective layer of monitoring by leveraging private information. Employees possess the corporation's entire information content; the assessment derived from this content would be relevant to the board's assessment of executive performance and pay. Corporate employees are also a major constituent of the corporate system and …
The Right To Domain Silent: Rebalancing Tort Incentives To Keep Pace With Information Availability For Criminal Suspects And Arrestees, Laura K. Mckenzie
The Right To Domain Silent: Rebalancing Tort Incentives To Keep Pace With Information Availability For Criminal Suspects And Arrestees, Laura K. Mckenzie
Vanderbilt Law Review
One nondescript evening, Dale Menard waited in a park for a friend to pick him up.When his friend did not arrive on schedule, Menard looked into the window of a nearby retirement home to check the time. Shortly thereafter, Menard was arrested based on a resident's prowler report and held by the Los Angeles Police Department for two days. The arrest was based purely on a misunderstanding, and the LAPD never brought charges against Menard. The police did, however, forward his arrest record and fingerprints to the FBI as part of a routine record exchange. One misunderstanding culminated in extended …
The Management Of Staff By Federal Court Of Appeals Judges, Mitu Gulati, Richard A. Posner
The Management Of Staff By Federal Court Of Appeals Judges, Mitu Gulati, Richard A. Posner
Vanderbilt Law Review
Federal court of appeals judges have staffs consisting usually of a secretary and four law clerks; some judges have externs as well (law students working part time without pay). These staffs are essential, given judicial workloads and judges'limitations. Yet not much is known about how the judges manage their staffs. Each judge knows, of course, but judges rarely exchange information about staff management. Nor is there, to our knowledge, a literature that attempts to compare and evaluate the varieties of staff management techniques employed by federal court of appeals judges. This Essay aims to fill that gap. It is based …
The Rise And Fall Of Plausibility Pleading?, Adam N. Steinman
The Rise And Fall Of Plausibility Pleading?, Adam N. Steinman
Vanderbilt Law Review
The Supreme Court's 2007 decision in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly and its 2009 decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal unleashed a torrent of scholarly reaction. Commentators charged these decisions with adopting a new pleading regime, "plausibility pleading," that upended the notice-pleading approach that had long prevailed in federal court. Whether a complaint could survive a motion to dismiss-it was argued-now depends on whether the court found the complaint plausible, allowing courts to second-guess a complaint's allegations without any opportunity for discovery or consideration of actual evidence. Lower courts began to cite Twombly and Iqbal at a remarkably high rate, and …
Human Trafficking In Multinational Supply Chains: A Corporate Director's Fiduciary Duty To Monitor And Eliminate Human Trafficking Violations, Laura Ezell
Vanderbilt Law Review
Corporate directors cannot afford to remain ignorant of human trafficking violations in corporate supply chains.' Corporations in the United States that benefit from supply-chain trafficking have been able to escape liability when the trafficking occurs in the labor force of their suppliers instead of the labor force of the corporation itself. However, the 2008 reauthorization of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act specifically targets this behavior under its criminal and civil provisions regarding financial benefit from labor trafficking. Corporations with trafficking violations in their supply chains risk criminal prosecution and civil suits filed by foreign and domestic victims, and the directors …