Law Commons^™

Valuation Averaging: A New Procedure For Resolving Valuation Disputes, Keith Sharfman

Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers

In this Article, Professor Sharfman addresses the problem of "discretionary valuation": that courts resolve valuation disputes arbitrarily and unpredictably, thus harming litigants and society. As a solution, he proposes the enactment of "valuation averaging," a new procedure for resolving valuation disputes modeled on the algorithmic valuation processes often agreed to by sophisticated private firms in advance of any dispute. He argues that by replacing the discretion of judges and juries with a mechanical valuation process, valuation averaging would cause litigants to introduce more plausible and conciliatory valuations into evidence and thereby reduce the cost of valuation litigation and increase the …

Constitutional Empiricism: Quasi-Neutral Principles And Constitutional Truths, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

The absence of neutrality and objectivity in constitutional decision-making has vexed scholars and courts. In this Article, the author describes and analyzes "constitutional empiricism," a trend instituted by the Rehnquist Court, which is characterized by judicial reliance in constitutional review on empirical and scientific conventions and processes. Courts have generally relied upon traditional sources, such as text and history, to interpret consititutional powers and rights. In its search for neutrality and objectivity, however, the Court has recently turned not only to social science and other data, which are fast becoming common sources of interpretation, but also to the precepts and …

Different Roads To The Rule Of Law: Their Importance For Law Reform In Taiwan, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

Talk of law reform is in the air throughout East Asia. Whether in Beijing or Tokyo or here, law reform is spoken of in terms of strengthening the Rule of Law. But what is the Rule of Law? Different legal systems have different roads to reach the Rule of Law. These different roads are noticeable mainly in the different emphases different systems place on two critical elements in the realization of the Rule of Law State, namely rules and the machinery for implementing the rules, i.e., courts and administrative agencies. The Rule of Law makes demands on both the legal …

Daubert & Danger: The "Fit" Of Expert Predictions In Civil Commitments, Alex Scherr

Scholarly Works

The opinions of experts in prediction in civil commitment hearings should help the courts, but over thirty years of commentary, judicial opinion, and scientific review argue that predictions of danger lack scientific rigor. The United States Supreme Court has commented regularly on the uncertainty of predictive science. The American Psychiatric Association has argued to the Court that "[t]he professional literature uniformly establishes that such predictions are fundamentally of very low reliability." Scientific studies indicate that some predictions do little better than chance or lay speculation, and even the best predictions leave substantial room for error about individual cases. The sharpest …

For And Against Marriage: A Revision., Anita Bernstein

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Us V. Pimentel, 346 F. 3d 285 - Court Of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 2003, Roger J. Miner '56

Circuit Court Opinions

These appeals arise from the January 9, 1995 gang-related murder of Galiat Santiago. Instead of being tried in New York State Supreme Court for violating the New York Penal Law, defendants-appellants Joanna Pimentel and George Viruet (collectively, the "Defendants") were tried by a jury and convicted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Johnson, J.). The Defendants were charged with violations of various federal laws, including the Violent Crimes in Aid of Racketeering ("VCAR") statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1959. VCAR provides for the federal prosecution of violent crime "when those allegedly responsible participated …

Symposium Editor's Note, Barbara A. Babb

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

An Autopsy Of The Structural Reform Injunction: Oops ... It's Still Moving, Myriam E. Gilles

Articles

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court's Labor And Employment Decisions: 2002-2003 Term, Maria O'Brien

Faculty Scholarship

This article summarizes U.S. Supreme Court cases from the October 2002 term that related directly or indirectly to labor or employment law or have implications for labor and employment practitioners. Of particular interest are the University of Michigan affirmative action cases' and the Texas criminal sodomy case. ² Although not nominally "labor and employment" cases, these cases will profoundly affect labor and employment issues. Lawrence v. Texas has already altered the lenses through which society views homosexuality and altered public discourse related to homosexuality and same-sex relationships. ³ The reasoning of the Court shows how far issues of sexuality have …

Delinquency Jurisdiction In A Unified Family Court: Balancing Intervention, Prevention, And Adjudication, Gloria Danziger

All Faculty Scholarship

This article will examine the demographics of the current juvenile delinquency caseloads and will argue that, despite trends toward greater punitive measures-including placement of juveniles in adult courts for certain offenses, the concept of a therapeutic "family-centered court," which inspired Jane Addams and her colleagues, remains the most promising approach to delinquency, articulated most notably by the proponents of the unified family court concept. The article will consider and address objections and concerns raised with respect to this approach, looking at ways in which several states have incorporated juvenile delinquency into a family-centered unified family court.

Problem-Solving Courts: From Innovation To Institutionalization, Michael C. Dorf, Jeffrey A. Fagan

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Opening Statement -- Making It Stick, Ronald L. Carlson, Michael S. Carlson

Popular Media

Every lawyer who sits down to plan her opening remarks for a coming trial has the same question: How far can I go in arguing my case during the opening statement? Can I mention the law? What about drawing a diagram of the accident on a blackboard? Will my opponent be able to stop me from displaying a couple of my dramatic exhibits to the jury?

Making one's theory of the case "stick" from the very start of the trial depends mightly on how far the lawyer can go in opening statement. Where the defense is primarily a legal or …

Approaches To Statutory Interpretation And Legislative History In France, Claire M. Germain

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Archetypal Trials And The Management Of Dissent: Some Insights From Marketing Theory, Pnina Lahav

Faculty Scholarship

Recent marketing theory uses the Jungian concept of the archetype to design strategies for the improvement of product selling. Mark and Pearson propose that archetypes such as the ruler, the hero, the outlaw, and the sage are useful in promoting a product. This article suggests that the concept of archetypes as well as myths such as the Prometheus myth and the myth of the expulsion from Paradise, when combined with the insights offered by Mark and Pearson, may help in understanding the management of trials of dissent as well. The article presents seven motifs that recur in trials of dissent …

Legal Indeterminacy And Institutional Design, Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Legal And Political Future Of Physician-Assisted Suicide, Larry Palmer

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Rethinking Judicial Elections, Charles G. Geyh

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Virginia's Capital Jurors, Stephen P. Garvey, Paul Marcus

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Next to Texas, no state has executed more capital defendants than Virginia. Moreover, the likelihood of a death sentence actually being carried out is greater in Virginia than it is elsewhere, while the length of time between the imposition of a death sentence and its actual execution is shorter. Virginia has thus earned a reputation among members of the defense bar as being among the worst of the death penalty states. Yet insofar as these facts about Virginia's death penalty relate primarily to the behavior of state and federal appellate courts, they suggest that what makes Virginia's death penalty unique …

First Options, Consent To Arbitration, And The Demise Of Separability: Restoring Access To Justice For Contracts With Arbitration Provisions, Richard C. Reuben

Faculty Publications

This article describes the context and current state of the law in this area under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), urges the Court to continue its path toward actual consent to arbitration, and suggests an approach for finally reconciling the tension between Prima Paint and First Options. Part II describes the nature and historical context of the arbitrability problem. Part III focuses specifically on the doctrine of separability, which is the most critical (and most complex) of these exceptions. Part IV discusses the impact on separability of recent U.S. Supreme Court case law, especially the 1995 decision in First Options …

The Choice-Of-Law Revolution In The United States: Notes On Rereading Von Mehren, Gary J. Simson

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Lay Participation In Legal Decision Making: Introduction To Law & Policy Special Issue, Valerie P. Hans

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

United States scholarship on lay participation revolves around one predominant form of lay participation, the jury (Hans & Vidmar forthcoming 2004). However, in the legal systems of many countries, laypeople participate as decision makers in other ways. Laypersons serve as judges (Provine 1986), magistrates (Diamond 1993), and private prosecutors (Perez Gil 2003). Lay and law-trained judges may also decide cases together in mixed tribunals (Kutnjak Ivkovi6 2003; Machura 2003; Vidmar 2002). Although diverse in structure, these methods share with the jury a set of animating ideas about lay involvement in legal decision making.

Many of these ideas appear to be …

Congress And The Making Of The Second Rehnquist Court, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

A Six-Three Rule: Reviving Consensus And Deference On The Supreme Court, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past three decades, the Supreme Court has struck down federal statutes by a bare majority with unprecedented frequency. This Article shows that five-four decisions regularly overturning acts of Congress are a relatively recent phenomenon, whereas earlier Courts generally exercised judicial review by supermajority voting.

One option is to establish the following rule: The Supreme Court may not declare an act of Congress unconstitutional without a two-thirds majority. The Supreme Court itself could establish this rule internally, just as it has created its nonmajority rules for granting certiorari and holds, or one Justice who would otherwise be the fifth …

Ub Viewpoint – Creation Of A Caring Justice System, Barbara A. Babb

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Introduction To The Jury At A Crossroad: The American Experience (Symposium Editor), Nancy S. Marder

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Does Lewis V. Casey Spell The End To Court-Ordered Improvement Of Prison Law Libraries?, Joseph L. Gerken

Law Librarian Journal Articles

The Supreme Court's decision in Lewis v. Casey raises the bar for advocates seeking court-ordered improvements in prison law libraries. Whether it dooms all such efforts to failure may well depend on the willingness of trial courts to take into account the realities of prisoners' pro se litigation.

The Politics Of Crime And The Threat To Judicial Independence, Jeannine Bell

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Wrongful Convictions And The Accuracy Of The Criminal Justice System, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

No abstract provided.

Daubert Asks The Right Questions: Now Appellate Courts Should Help Find The Right Answers, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Squeezing Daubert Out Of The Picture, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

In this essay, I will offer some thoughts on how we might reframe the issues governing the admissibility of expert evidence. My principal focus is not on any particular type of expert evidence but on broader questions: the extent to which we ought to rely on rulings of admissibility, the standards that should govern admissibility rulings, and the role of the trial and appellate courts in making those rulings. To some extent, I will concentrate on the context of criminal cases, but for the most part my conclusions apply in both civil and criminal litigation. Here are my conclusions: First, …