Law Commons^™

Who Will Judge The Many When The Game Is Through: Considering The Profound Differences Between Mental Health Courts And Traditional Involuntary Civil Commitment Courts, Michael L. Perlin

Articles & Chapters

This paper is an expansion of a presentation given by the author at the annual Therapeutic Jurisprudence Workshop at Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, October 15, 2016. There is a developing robust literature about mental health courts (MHCrts) in the United States, and researchers have begun to focus on a broad range of empirical issues, such as the extent to which defendants are competent to waive their trial rights in such settings, the significance of diversion, etc. Also, advocates and other scholars have engaged in vigorous debates about the value of these courts, and the extent …

Trouble Counting To Three: Circuit Splits And Confusion In Interpreting The Prison Litigation Reform Act's Three Strikes Rule, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915(G), Molly Guptill Manning

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Why A Disability Rights Tribunal Must Be Premised On Therapeutic Jurisprudence Principles, Michael L. Perlin, Mehgan Gallagher

Articles & Chapters

The authors have previously written about the need for a disability rights tribunal in Asia (DRTAP) along with an information center (DRICAP) as part of that tribunal so that litigants can easily access the controlling domestic case law, statutes and regulations of the participating nations.

We believe a successful DRTAP must be premised on therapeutic jurisprudence (TJ) principles, and that its creation would be hollow without dedicated and knowledgeable lawyers representing the population in question. In accordance with TJ principles, it must incorporate “voice, validation and voluntary participation” to insure that litigants have a sense of voice or a chance …

Breaking Bad Briefs, Heidi K. Brown

Articles & Chapters

This article focuses on the practical effects of bad briefing on our legal process and suggests a holistic remedy: a system-wide commitment to striving to instill in law students and lawyers a respect for legal writing as, not only a fundamental competency of our chosen profession, but a talent that requires initial training, focused study, repeated practice, and conscious evolution throughout the arc of one’s legal education and career. Effective brief-writing is not as simple as a quick cut-and-paste job, a template download, or a stream-of-consciousness exercise, even for lawyers who repeatedly practice one type of case. Part I of …

The Judge, He Cast His Robe Aside: Mental Health Courts, Dignity And Due Process, Michael L. Perlin

Articles & Chapters

One of the most important developments in the past two decades in the way that criminal defendants with mental disabilities are treated in the criminal process has been the creation and the expansion of mental health courts, one kind of “problem-solving court.” There are now over 300 such courts in operation in States, some dealing solely with misdemeanors, some solely with non-violent offenders, and some with no such restrictions. There is a wide range of dispositional alternatives available to judges in these cases, and an even wider range of judicial attitudes. And the entire concept of “mental health courts” is …

Regulating Discourtesy On The Bench: A Study In The Evolution Of Judicial Independence, Bruce Green, Rebecca Roiphe

Articles & Chapters

In this paper, we argue that the myth of the detached, rational judge, free from emotion runs the risk of undermining the quality of judging, obscuring the transparency of judicial decisions, and deterring the development of diverse judicial styles. We explore the history of the myth of the detached judge and how it made its way into rules of judicial conduct. By contextualizing this image of the judiciary, the article concludes that the rules of judicial conduct have come to embody an antiquated understanding of judicial independence and ought to be revised to reflect a more modern concept of the …

A Call For The End Of The Doctrine Of Realignment, Jacob S. Sherkow

Articles & Chapters

In Indianapolis v. Chase National Bank, 1941, the Supreme Court established the doctrine of realignment, requiring federal courts to examine the issues in dispute and realign each party as plaintiff or defendant if necessary. Due to the complete diversity requirement, realignment gave the federal courts the ability to both create and destroy diversity jurisdiction. Since 1941, the federal courts have struggled to interpret the central holding in Indianapolis, and have created several competing "tests" for realignment. This confusion has made the doctrine of realignment unworkable. Realignment-along with each of the present tests-encourages jurisdictional abuses by forcing the federal courts to …

The Class Action Fairness Act In Perspective: The Old And The New In Federal Jurisdictional Reform, Edward A. Purcell Jr.

Articles & Chapters

The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) was the product of an extended and well-organized political campaign. In Congress, its passage required a grinding eight-year effort, several modifications to the original proposal, numerous committee hearings, multiple reports by both Houses, political compromises that drew some Democratic support, two unsuccessful attempts to terminate debate in the Senate by imposing cloture, and strenuous efforts to amend in both the House and Senate when the bill came to the floor for a final vote. Passage also required Republican control of both Houses of Congress and the presidency as well.

Killing Them Softly: Meditations On A Painful Punishment Of Death, Robert I. Blecker

Articles & Chapters

This brief essay argues that any attempt by the U.S. Supreme Court and others to establish a painless punishment, especially lethal injection, fails logically and morally.

From the beginning, by definition, etymologically and existentially, “punishment” and “pain” have been inseparably connected. Those who advocate ‘painless punishment’ call for contradiction. Whether looking to the future (utilitarians) or the past (retributivists), we once clearly understood and embraced the inseparable connection between punishment and pain. Gradually, however, punishment has morphed into something which denies its own nature, culminating in today's move toward a massive dose of anesthetic as the ultimate punishment - as …

Gazing Into The Crystal Ball: Reflections On The Standards State Judges Should Use To Ascertain Federal Law, Donald H. Zeigler

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Trial Courts And Social Change: The Evolution Of A Field Of Study, Frank W. Munger

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Afterword: Studying Litigation And Social Change, Frank W. Munger

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

The Legal Culture Of The Formative Period In Sherman Act Jurisprudence, William P. Lapiana

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Does Competency Matter After Charters?, Michael L. Perlin, Michael L. Perlin

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Law, Change, And Litigation: A Critical Examination Of An Empirical Research Tradition, Frank W. Munger

Articles & Chapters

This article examines the theory and empirical methods of recent studies of law and litigation. It argues that the recent interest in longitudinal studies of trial court dockets proceeds from a deeply rooted functionalist theoretical tradition in empirical work on courts. Functionalist theory, through its sophisticated application in the work of James Willard Hurst, is described as the direct or indirect source of theory for longitudinal litigation studies. Though there are many reasons for suspecting that fuctionalist theory is inadequate, it has seldom been rejected through proper empirical testing of its hypotheses. The theory, often poorly conceptualized, is discussed here …

Law, Litigation And Social Change: A Critical Evaluation Of An Empirical Research Tradition, Frank W. Munger

Articles & Chapters

This article examines the theory and empirical methods of recent studies of law and litigation. It argues that the recent interest in longitudinal studies of trial court dockets proceeds from a deeply rooted functionalist theoretical tradition in empirical work on courts. Functionalist theory, through its sophisticated application in the work of James Willard Hurst, is described as the direct or indirect source of theory for longitudinal litigation studies. Though there are many reasons for suspecting that fuctionalist theory is inadequate, it has seldom been rejected through proper empirical testing of its hypotheses. The theory, often poorly conceptualized, is discussed here …

Tort Litigation And Social Change: Accidents And Trial Court Litigation In West Virginia, 1870-1940, Frank W. Munger

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Review Essay: Charting The Bicentennial, Richard B. Bernstein

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Rights Require Remedies: A New Approach To The Enforcement Of Rights In The Federal Courts, Donald H. Zeigler

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Inevitable Errors: The Preponderance Of The Evidence Standard In Civil Litigation, James Brook

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Ashbacker Rites In Administrative Practice: A Case Study Of Broadcast Regulation., Jacob W. Mayer, Michael Botein

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Will Courts Meet The Challenge Of Technology?, Jethro K. Lieberman

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Introduction: Environmental Law Section, Second Circuit Review, 1974–75 Term, Ross Sandler

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Cafeteria Workers Revisited: Does The Commander Have Plenary Power To Control Access To His Base?, Jethro K. Lieberman

Articles & Chapters

The Supreme Court's decision in Cafeteria Workers v. McElroy (1961) has often been cited by military commanders to support claimed plenary power over access to the installation commanded. Observing that plenary power is a rarity in contemporary society, Lieutenant Lieberman questions the prof erred interpretation of Cafeteria Workers particularly in light of more recent decisions. He concludes that while commanders do possess broad powers over access, the power is not plenary but must be weighed in each instance against the individual's rights of freedom of speech and association.