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

Law Commons

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

Series

Civil Procedure

University of Georgia School of Law

Choice of law

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Preliminary Injunction Standard In Diversity: A Typical Unguided Erie Choice, David E. Shipley Jul 2016

The Preliminary Injunction Standard In Diversity: A Typical Unguided Erie Choice, David E. Shipley

Scholarly Works

The standard for granting preliminary injunctions in some states is not the same as the preliminary injunction standard that is followed in the federal district courts in the federal circuit where the state is located. For example, the interlocutory injunction standard in Georgia’s superior courts is not as demanding as the preliminary injunction standard in Georgia’s federal courts. Although state and federal courts in Georgia consider four similar factors in deciding whether to grant or deny provisional injunctive relief, a balancing or sliding scale approach can be used in Georgia’s courts; the moving party need not prove all four of …


Resolving Interstate Conflicts Over Same-Sex Non-Marriage, Hillel Y. Levin Jan 2011

Resolving Interstate Conflicts Over Same-Sex Non-Marriage, Hillel Y. Levin

Scholarly Works

States have adopted several different regimes of recognition for same-sex couples. A few states allow same-sex couples to marry; several others offer marriage-like partnerships (usually called civil unions), which provide all or nearly all of the substantive rights and responsibilities associated with marriage; still others offer marriage-lite partnerships (sometimes called reciprocal benefits arrangements), which provide a small subset of the rights and responsibilities associated with marriage; and, of course, others offer no recognition at all.

What happens when these regimes of recognition collide? For example, what happens when a couple marries in Massachusetts and then moves to a marriage-like state, …


Adrift On A Sea Of Uncertainty: Preserving Uniformity In Patent Law Post-Vornado Through Deference To The Federal Circuit, Larry D. Thompson Mar 2004

Adrift On A Sea Of Uncertainty: Preserving Uniformity In Patent Law Post-Vornado Through Deference To The Federal Circuit, Larry D. Thompson

Scholarly Works

Congress created the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 1982, and granted that court exclusive appellate jurisdiction over civil actions arising under patent law. Congress's primary goals in creating the Federal Circuit were to produce a more uniform patent jurisprudence and to reduce forum shopping based on favorable patent law. But in the 2002 decision of Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Systems, the Supreme Court held that patent counterclaims alone could not create Federal Circuit jurisdiction. This decision not only overruled the Federal Circuit's longstanding jurisdictional rule, but also opened the door for Regional …