Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 10 of 10

Full-Text Articles in Law

Determining Ripeness Of Substantive Due Process Claims Brought By Landowners Against Local Governments, David S. Mendel Nov 1996

Determining Ripeness Of Substantive Due Process Claims Brought By Landowners Against Local Governments, David S. Mendel

Michigan Law Review

Landowners who sustain economic harm from arbitrary and capricious applications of land use regulations may sue the local government entities responsible for applying those regulations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the local government entities deprived them of substantive due process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. A landowner who brings this claim - an "as-applied arbitrary and capricious substantive due process" claim - may in appropriate cases seek declaratory and injunctive relief, damages, and attorney's fees. Despite controversy among courts and commentators over both the definition of property interests protected by the Due Process Clause and the standard …


The Metaphysics Of Tracing: Substituted Title And Property Rhetoric, Craig Rotherham Apr 1996

The Metaphysics Of Tracing: Substituted Title And Property Rhetoric, Craig Rotherham

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

Tracing is conceptualized as the "following" of an object through an exchange transaction and into the product of that exchange. Why is this so and what are the consequences? This article argues that the presentation of tracing in the metaphysical language of transmutation allows the doctrine to be depicted as consistent with axiomatic notions of property that understand it as pre-political and that preclude judicial readjustment of proprietary rights. However, the metaphysical conceptualization of tracing gives the remedy a conceptual structure that has resulted in the doctrine developing dysfunctionally when compared with the normative justifications that motivated its initial development. …


The Copyright Act Of 1976 And Prejudgment Interest, Jon M. Powers Mar 1996

The Copyright Act Of 1976 And Prejudgment Interest, Jon M. Powers

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that prejudgment interest should be presumptively available on damages-plus-profits awards under section 504(b) but should not be available for statutory damages under section 504(c). Part I argues that Supreme Court precedent suggests that the explicit reference to interest found in the Patent Act does not prevent courts from awarding prejudgment interest under the 1976 Copyright Act. Part II asserts that the 1976 Copyright Act's silence regarding prejudgment interest does not represent a congressional choice to exclude this remedy and that, in the face of this silence, the underlying purposes of section 504 should determine the propriety of …


Turning From Tort To Administration, Richard A. Nagareda Feb 1996

Turning From Tort To Administration, Richard A. Nagareda

Michigan Law Review

My objective here is to challenge the notion that the recent mass tort settlements - for all their novel qualities in the mass tort area - are truly sui generis in the law. Rather, I contend that the rise of such settlements in tort mirrors the development of public administrative agencies earlier in this century - that, in both instances, powerful new institutions emerged outside preexisting channels of control to wield significant power over human lives and resources. I argue that courts usefully may draw upon familiar doctrines of judicial review in administrative law to form a conceptual framework for …


Notes: Negligently Inflicted Emotional Distress Resulting Solely From Property Damage Is Not A Compensable Injury. Dobbins V. Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, 338 Md. 341, 658 A.2d 675 (1995), Scott A. Mirsky Jan 1996

Notes: Negligently Inflicted Emotional Distress Resulting Solely From Property Damage Is Not A Compensable Injury. Dobbins V. Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, 338 Md. 341, 658 A.2d 675 (1995), Scott A. Mirsky

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.


Medtronic V. Lohr: State Lawsuits May Proceed Against Medical Device Manufacturers, Robert A. Gerberry Jan 1996

Medtronic V. Lohr: State Lawsuits May Proceed Against Medical Device Manufacturers, Robert A. Gerberry

Journal of Law and Health

This comment discusses the Medical Device Amendments of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and its effect on the marketing of medical products. Part II examines the statutory language of the MDA and its regulatory impact on medical devices. Part III explores the history of the preemption doctrine established by the Supreme Court Cipollone. Part IV delineates the facts and procedural history of Medtronic v. Lohr and analyzes the effect of this case on the federal preemption of state common law suits. Finally, Part V assesses the impact of this decision on the medical device industry and the expansiveness …


Ridicule Or Recourse: Parents Falsely Accused Of Past Sexual Abuse Fight Back , Jeffrey M. Whitesell Jan 1996

Ridicule Or Recourse: Parents Falsely Accused Of Past Sexual Abuse Fight Back , Jeffrey M. Whitesell

Journal of Law and Health

This Note argues that wrongly accused parents should be granted standing by the courts to bring suit against therapists who negligently suggest that their children are victims of sexual abuse. The first section will analyze the validity of recovered memories obtained through the use of various suggestive techniques. The second section will explore the various causes of action that courts are considering actionable by innocent third parties against the therapists who implant false memories. The causes of action that will be analyzed are malpractice, negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, loss of companionship and society, and breach of contract. …


Victim Reparations In The Inter-American Human Rights System: A Critical Assessment Of Current Practice And Procedure, Jo M. Pasqualucci Jan 1996

Victim Reparations In The Inter-American Human Rights System: A Critical Assessment Of Current Practice And Procedure, Jo M. Pasqualucci

Michigan Journal of International Law

Part II of this article analyzes the statutory authority for reparations in the Inter-American system in light of the legislative history of the American Convention's reparations provision and compares that authority with that provided for in the European human rights system. Part III sets forth the Inter-American Court's procedures for determining reparations once State responsibility has been established. Part IV evaluates the parties who may receive reparations. Part V analyzes the types of reparations provided generally under international law and specifically in the Inter-American system. Part VI criticizes the Court's determination to grant only a small share of the reparations …


The Circuit Split On Title Vii Personal Supervisor Liability, Ming K. Ayvas Jan 1996

The Circuit Split On Title Vii Personal Supervisor Liability, Ming K. Ayvas

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Note examines the competing rationales for and against individual supervisor liability under Title VII, and concludes that supervisor liability is the better reasoned view. It explains how courts construe the term "employer" to either allow or disallow direct supervisor liability. It discusses the rationales for and against individual supervisor liability. It concludes that individual supervisor liability is the better reasoned view, on construction, policy and comparative grounds, and proposes joint and several liability for supervisors and employers in all Title VII cases, which will clarify when respondeat superior liability is appropriate under Title VII. This proposal will deter Title …


Covington V. District Of Columbia: Judicial Clouding Of A Once Clear Burden Of Proof In Awards Of Attorney Fees Under 42 U.S.C. Section 1988, Andrew P. Iv Sutor Jan 1996

Covington V. District Of Columbia: Judicial Clouding Of A Once Clear Burden Of Proof In Awards Of Attorney Fees Under 42 U.S.C. Section 1988, Andrew P. Iv Sutor

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.