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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

Zuni Indian Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act Of 2003, United States 108th Congress Jun 2003

Zuni Indian Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act Of 2003, United States 108th Congress

Native American Water Rights Settlement Project

Federal Legislation: Zuni Indian Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of 2003, PL 108-34, 117 Stat. 782 (June 23, 2003). Parties: Zuni Tribe, US, AZ. The Act ratifies the Settlement Agreement concerning Zuni Indian Tribe water rights in the Little CO River basin, AZ. It authorizes appropriations for acquisition of water rights and associated lands and, for fiscal years 2004 through 2006; and for actions necessary to restore, rehabilitate, and maintain the Zuni Heaven Reservation, including the Sacred Lake, wetlands, and riparian areas. The US shall take legal title of specified lands in the Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian ...


Ub Viewpoint – Aol/Microsoft Settlement Could Harm Consumers, Robert H. Lande Jun 2003

Ub Viewpoint – Aol/Microsoft Settlement Could Harm Consumers, Robert H. Lande

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Tohono O'Odham Settlement, Tonhono O'Odham Nation Et Al Apr 2003

Tohono O'Odham Settlement, Tonhono O'Odham Nation Et Al

Native American Water Rights Settlement Project

Settlement Agreement: Tohono O'odham Settlement (Apr. 30, 2003). Parties: Tohono O'odham Nation, AZ, US, Tucson, Asarco Inc., Farmers Investment Co., two allottee classes. The Settlement Agreement has been revised to eliminate any conflicts with PL 108-451. The parties are a part of the Gila River adjudication. The Nation has a water right of 79,200 acre-feet per year, sourced in ground and surface water. This water may be put to any use. The Nation may use the water off-reservation according to the attached contracts or pursuant to state law, but the uses must remain within the state. Provisions ...


Forgetfulness, Fuzziness, Functionality, Fairness And Freedom, In Dispute Resolution, Jeffrey W. Stempel Jan 2003

Forgetfulness, Fuzziness, Functionality, Fairness And Freedom, In Dispute Resolution, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Professor Subrin is a self-professed traditionalist who has been one of the most forceful defenders of what I might term neo-traditional “Clarkian” litigation. By that, I mean the model of civil disputing in which litigation is a primary vehicle. More important, the litigation is based on notice pleading, broad discovery, and a preference for adjudication on the merits.

Key Subrin works over the years have focused on the historical path of the Clarkian model, which served to fuel much of the law revolution of the mid-Twentieth Century, to the “new era” of civil procedure and dispute resolution that dominated the ...


Anticompetitive Settlement Of Intellectual Property Disputes, Mark D. Janis, Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Mark A. Lemley Jan 2003

Anticompetitive Settlement Of Intellectual Property Disputes, Mark D. Janis, Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Mark A. Lemley

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.


Anticompetitive Settlement Of Intellectual Property Disputes, Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Mark D. Janis, Mark A. Lemley Jan 2003

Anticompetitive Settlement Of Intellectual Property Disputes, Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Mark D. Janis, Mark A. Lemley

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law

The overwhelming majority of intellectual property lawsuits settle before trial. These settlements involve agreements between the patentee and the accused infringer, parties who are often competitors before the lawsuit. Because these competitors may agree to stop competing, to regulate the price each charges, and to exchange information about products and prices, settlements of intellectual property disputes naturally raise antitrust concerns. In this paper, we suggest a way to reconcile the interests of intellectual property law and antitrust law in evaluating intellectual property settlements. In Part I, we provide background on the issue. Part II argues that in most cases courts ...