Law Commons^™

Standardized Tests, Erroneous Scores, And Tort Liability, Vincent R. Johnson

Faculty Articles

Tort law offers an appropriate vehicle for handling the increased prevalence of standardized testing in the wake of the No Child Left Behind Act and the potential miss-scoring problems that arise with standardized tests. This incentivizes the use of reasonable care in scoring standardized tests and justly compensates for miss-scoring harms when doing so does not unduly burden testing agencies. Neither contract law nor the existing Truth-in-Testing law adequately affords the sort of remedies and protections the issue of standardized testing and miss-scoring pose.

The ability for tort liability to adequately hold testing agencies accountable for miss-scoring errors and afford …

The Court Of Appeals For The Fifth Circuit: A Legal Analysis And Statistical Review Of 2005-2006 Insurance Decisions, Willy E. Rice

Faculty Articles

he Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decided and published twenty-four insurance-related appeals between June 2005 and May 2006 from cases originating in seven federal district courts. Like petitioners in prior years, the overwhelming majority of the 2005-2006 appellants petitioned the court of appeals to reverse or vacate district courts' adverse summary judgments as well as the lower courts' allegedly questionable interpretations of various insurance contracts. Most of the controversies involved familiar procedural and substantive questions of law, but the Fifth Circuit also decided many questions of fact. Furthermore, several preemption questions and disputes over subject matter jurisdiction appeared among the …

Thompson/Mcnulty Memo Internal Investigations: Ethical Concerns Of The Deputized Counsel, Colin P. Marks

Faculty Articles

Outside counsel who conduct internal investigations for corporate clients have always faced ethical concerns, especially when interviewing employees. Generally, a carefully crafted blanket statement at the beginning of the interview explaining outside counsel's role was sufficient to address these concerns. However, recent charging policies adopted by the Department of Justice ("DOJ") have drastically changed the rules. These policies, articulated in what is now commonly referred to as the "Thompson Memo," after the author and then Deputy General Larry Thompson, allowed prosecutors to consider factors such as waivers of the attorney-client privilege and work-product protections and whether the company provides legal …

Categorical Exclusions From Capital Punishment: How Many Wrongs Make A Right?, Dora W. Klein

Faculty Articles

The two categorical exclusions of age and mental capacity will impact not only those offenders who are excluded from the death penalty, but also those offenders who remain subject to this punishment. The Supreme Court’s decisions in Roper v. Simmons and Atkins v. Virginia raise the issue that a capital-punishment-limiting decision possesses wrongs of its own. Both decisions limit the death penalty—Roper excludes from this punishment offenders who committed their crimes before they were eighteen years old and Atkins excludes offenders who are mentally retarded. But in both cases, the Supreme Court overstated the uniformity and universality of traits associated …

The Evolving Standard For The Granting Of Mandamus Relief In The Texas Supreme Court: One More Mile Marker Down The Road Of No Return, Richard E. Flint

Faculty Articles

The Prudential balancing test should be of concern for anyone interested in the rule of law. This test is the current binding precedent for determining when an appellate court should exercise its mandamus authority upon a finding of a clear abuse of discretion. This test has substantially altered one of the most time honored principles of mandamus jurisprudence, and replaced it with a newly articulated standard that leads to nothing short of ad hoc decision making.

In the area of mandamus jurisprudence, the Texas Supreme Court has, from time to time, developed different ways to circumvent the common law history …

Threading The Eye Of The Erisa Needle: Erisa Preemption And Alternative Legal Schemes To Fill The Regulatory Vacuum,, Bernard D. Reams Jr., Michael P. Forrest

Faculty Articles

Popular consensus suggests that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) is a mess, and one of historic proportions. ERISA’s comprehensive reach to protect employer-provided benefits has in practice produced unintended, if not contradictory, results.

Congress passed ERISA over thirty years ago to protect the rights of employees who benefit from employer pension and welfare benefit plans. It did so with a series of regulations that promote uniformity in litigation across the various states through “strong preemption language.” The goal of uniformity arguably benefits workers by imposing regular standards of conduct which lend predictability to the scope of litigation, or …

The Storm Between The Quiet: Tumult In The Texas Supreme Court, 1911-21, Michael S. Ariens

Faculty Articles

The Texas Supreme Court from 1911–1921 is best known not for the law it made or the opinions it wrote, but for its failure to decide cases. Although the supreme court’s difficulty in clearing its docket existed before 1911, the number of outstanding cases exploded during the second decade of the twentieth century.

Arguably, the issue of statewide prohibition and the divergent views held on that issue by members of the Texas Supreme Court was the driving force behind the disharmony and dysfunctionality of the court during this decade. Statewide prohibition explains why elections of candidates to the court were …