Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Judges (54)
- Courts (29)
- Civil Procedure (7)
- Legal History (7)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (6)
-
- Jurisprudence (5)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (5)
- Constitutional Law (4)
- Law and Politics (4)
- Law and Gender (3)
- Law and Race (3)
- Legal Education (3)
- Legal Profession (3)
- Political Science (3)
- Supreme Court of the United States (3)
- Administrative Law (2)
- Contracts (2)
- Criminal Law (2)
- Legal Writing and Research (2)
- Other Law (2)
- Sociology (2)
- American Politics (1)
- Arts and Humanities (1)
- Civil Law (1)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (1)
- Commercial Law (1)
- Communication (1)
- Communications Law (1)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (1)
- Institution
-
- Duke Law (25)
- Columbia Law School (12)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (12)
- Fordham Law School (9)
- Barry University School of Law (6)
-
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (5)
- Boston University School of Law (4)
- Nova Southeastern University (3)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (2)
- University of Louisville (2)
- California Western School of Law (1)
- Mitchell Hamline School of Law (1)
- Western New England University School of Law (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 83
Full-Text Articles in Law
Judicial Management Inside The Courts, Marin K. Levy
Judicial Management Inside The Courts, Marin K. Levy
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Institutional Mismatch Of State Civil Courts, Colleen F. Shanahan, Jessica K. Steinberg, Alyx Mark, Anna E. Carpenter
The Institutional Mismatch Of State Civil Courts, Colleen F. Shanahan, Jessica K. Steinberg, Alyx Mark, Anna E. Carpenter
Faculty Scholarship
State civil courts are central institutions in American democracy. Though designed for dispute resolution, these courts function as emergency rooms for social needs in the face of the failure of the legislative and executive branches to disrupt or mitigate inequality. We reconsider national case data to analyze the presence of social needs in state civil cases. We then use original data from courtroom observation and interviews to theorize how state civil courts grapple with the mismatch between the social needs people bring to these courts and their institutional design. This institutional mismatch leads to two roles of state civil courts …
A Tale Of Two Civil Procedures, Pamela K. Bookman, Colleen F. Shanahan
A Tale Of Two Civil Procedures, Pamela K. Bookman, Colleen F. Shanahan
Faculty Scholarship
In the United States, there are two kinds of courts: federal and state. Civil procedure classes and scholarship tend to focus on the federal, but refer to and make certain assumptions about state courts. While this dichotomy makes sense when discussing some issues, like federal subject matter jurisdiction, for many aspects of procedure this breakdown can be misleading. When understanding American civil justice, two different categories of courts are just as salient: those that routinely include lawyers, and those where lawyers are fundamentally absent.
This essay urges civil procedure teachers and scholars to think about our courts as “lawyered” courts—which …
The Promise Of Senior Judges, Marin K. Levy
The Promise Of Senior Judges, Marin K. Levy
Faculty Scholarship
Judges, lawmakers, and scholars have long debated whether the federal courts of appeals are understaffed and, if so, how Congress should go about redressing that fact. Even though there is currently a strong argument that some new judgeships should be created, such a path presents logistical complications. If a significant number of seats are added to the appellate bench, circuits may eventually become too large to function well. And if a significant number of circuits are ultimately split, the total number of federal appellate courts may become too large for the judiciary as a whole to function well. Furthermore, there …
Judges And The Deregulation Of The Lawyer's Monopoly, Jessica K. Steinberg, Anna E. Carpenter, Colleen F. Shanahan, Alyx Mark
Judges And The Deregulation Of The Lawyer's Monopoly, Jessica K. Steinberg, Anna E. Carpenter, Colleen F. Shanahan, Alyx Mark
Faculty Scholarship
In a revolutionary moment for the legal profession, the deregulation of legal services is taking hold in many parts of the country. Utah and Arizona, for instance, are experimenting with new regulations that permit nonlawyer advocates to play an active role in assisting citizens who may not otherwise have access to legal services. In addition, amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct in both states, as well as those being contemplated in California, now allow nonlawyers to have a partnership stake in law firms, which may dramatically change the way capital for the delivery of legal services is raised as …
From Judge To Dean And Back Again: Reflections On Transitions, David F. Levi
From Judge To Dean And Back Again: Reflections On Transitions, David F. Levi
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Fact-Law Distinction: Strategic Factfinding And Lawmaking In A Judicial Hierarchy, Sepehr Shahshahani
The Fact-Law Distinction: Strategic Factfinding And Lawmaking In A Judicial Hierarchy, Sepehr Shahshahani
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
What's The Difference Between A Conclusion And A Fact?, Howard M. Erichson
What's The Difference Between A Conclusion And A Fact?, Howard M. Erichson
Faculty Scholarship
In Ashcroft v. Iqbal, building on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, the Supreme Court instructed district courts to treat a complaint’s conclusions differently from allegations of fact. Facts, but not conclusions, are assumed true for purposes of a motion to dismiss. The Court did little to help judges or lawyers understand this elusive distinction, and, indeed, obscured the distinction with its language. The Court said it was distinguishing “legal conclusions” from factual allegations. The application in Twombly and Iqbal, however, shows that the relevant distinction is not between law and fact, but rather between different types of factual assertions. This …
The Empty Chair: Reflections On An Absent Justice, Jennifer L. Behrens
The Empty Chair: Reflections On An Absent Justice, Jennifer L. Behrens
Faculty Scholarship
This article examines a January 1888 letter to U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Morrison Waite from Associate Justice Stanley Matthews. Justice Matthews requested time away from the notoriously overworked Court’s session in order to attend the funeral of Dr. Peter Parker, renowned medical missionary and diplomat. The piece presents biographical sketches of Justice Matthews and Dr. Parker, and considers the historical context of the potential absence on the late nineteenth-century Court’s operations.
Learned Hand And The Objective Theory Of Contract Interpretation, Daniel P. O'Gorman
Learned Hand And The Objective Theory Of Contract Interpretation, Daniel P. O'Gorman
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Conflicted Mutual Fund Voting In Corporate Law, Sean J. Griffith, Dorothy Lund
Conflicted Mutual Fund Voting In Corporate Law, Sean J. Griffith, Dorothy Lund
Faculty Scholarship
Recent Delaware jurisprudence establishes a disinterested vote of shareholders as the pathway out of heightened judicial scrutiny. The stated rationale for this policy is that shareholders, the real party at interest, are better protected by the ballot box than by the courtroom. As long as informed, disinterested shareholders with an economic stake in the outcome of the vote can effectively express their preferences through voting—the court need not scrutinize the underlying transaction. Rather, it can defer to the outcome under the business judgment rule.
But shareholder voting is not always as direct as this reasoning implies. Instead, voting outcomes increasingly …
Judicial Activism In Trial Courts, Bruce A. Green, Rebecca Roiphe
Judicial Activism In Trial Courts, Bruce A. Green, Rebecca Roiphe
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Peddling Ignorance: A New Falsity Standard For Scientific Knowledge Fraud Cases, Wes Henricksen
Peddling Ignorance: A New Falsity Standard For Scientific Knowledge Fraud Cases, Wes Henricksen
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Keys To The Kingdom: Judges, Pre-Hearing Procedure, And Access To Justice, Colleen F. Shanahan
The Keys To The Kingdom: Judges, Pre-Hearing Procedure, And Access To Justice, Colleen F. Shanahan
Faculty Scholarship
Judges see themselves as – and many reforming voices urge them to be – facilitators of access to justice for pro se parties in our state civil and administrative courts. Judges’ roles in pro se access to justice are inextricably linked with procedures and substantive law, yet our understanding of this relationship is limited. Do we change the rules, judicial behavior, or both to help self-represented parties? We have begun to examine this nuanced question in the courtroom, but we have not examined it in a potentially more promising context: pre-hearing motions made outside the courtroom. Outside the courtroom, judges …
When Should The First Amendment Protect Judges From Their Unethical Speech?, Lynne H. Rambo
When Should The First Amendment Protect Judges From Their Unethical Speech?, Lynne H. Rambo
Faculty Scholarship
Judges harm the judicial institution when they engage in inflammatory or overtly political extrajudicial speech. The judiciary can be effective only when it has the trust of the citizenry, and judicial statements of that sort render it impossible for citizens to see judges as neutral and contemplative arbiters. This lack of confidence would seem especially dangerous in times like these, when the citizenry is as polarized as it has ever been.
Ethical codes across the country (based on the Model Code of Judicial Conduct) prohibit judges from making these partisan, prejudicial or otherwise improper remarks. Any discipline can be undone, …
Weighing Democracy And Judicial Legitimacy In Judicial Selection, Kenneth S. Klein
Weighing Democracy And Judicial Legitimacy In Judicial Selection, Kenneth S. Klein
Faculty Scholarship
For over two centuries Americans have debated whether judges should be elected or appointed. While the explicitly-framed tension has been about the relative importance of judicial independence and judicial accountability in a democracy, the underlying issue has been about which structure better promotes the legitimacy of the judiciary. An institution has legitimacy when it enjoys diffuse support even for controversial decisions. Judicial legitimacy is in inherent tension with a judiciary in a democracy, since democracy implicitly assumes political elements to selection of all leaders (including judges), while judicial legitimacy is undermined by politics. The contemporary work on the relationship between …
Studying The "New" Civil Judges, Anna E. Carpenter, Jessica K. Steinberg, Colleen F. Shanahan, Alyx Mark
Studying The "New" Civil Judges, Anna E. Carpenter, Jessica K. Steinberg, Colleen F. Shanahan, Alyx Mark
Faculty Scholarship
We know very little about the people and institutions that make up the bulk of the United States civil justice system: state judges and state courts. Our understanding of civil justice is based primarily on federal litigation and the decisions of appellate judges. Staggeringly little legal scholarship focuses on state courts and judges. We simply do not know what most judges are doing in their day-to-day courtroom roles or in their roles as institutional actors and managers of civil justice infrastructure. We know little about the factors that shape and influence judicial practices, let alone the consequences of those practices …
Panel Assignment In The Federal Courts Of Appeals, Marin K. Levy
Panel Assignment In The Federal Courts Of Appeals, Marin K. Levy
Faculty Scholarship
It is common knowledge that the federal courts of appeals typically hear cases in panels of three judges and that the composition of the panel can have significant consequences for case outcomes and for legal doctrine more generally. Yet neither legal scholars nor social scientists have focused on the question of how judges are selected for their panels. Instead, a substantial body of scholarship simply assumes that panel assignment is random. This Article provides what, up until this point, has been a missing account of panel assignment. Drawing on a multiyear qualitative study of five circuit courts, including in-depth interviews …
Courts Of Good And Ill Repute: Garoupa And Ginsburg’S Judicial Reputation: A Comparative Theory, Tracey E. George, G. Mitu Gulati
Courts Of Good And Ill Repute: Garoupa And Ginsburg’S Judicial Reputation: A Comparative Theory, Tracey E. George, G. Mitu Gulati
Faculty Scholarship
Nuno Garoupa and Tom Ginsburg have published an ambitious book that seeks to account for the great diversity of judicial systems based, in part, on how courts are designed to marshal the power of a high public opinion of the judiciary. Judges, the book posits, care deeply about their reputations both inside and outside the courts. Courts are designed to capitalize on judges’ desire to maximize their reputation, and judges’ existing stock of reputation can affect the design of the courts which they serve. We find much to like in this book, ranging from its intriguing and ambitious positive claims …
Joseph Story, Ralf Michaels
Joseph Story, Ralf Michaels
Faculty Scholarship
Joseph Story (1779-1845) was one of the greatest and most influential American lawyers of all time. Both as a Supreme Court Justice and as a professor at Harvard Law School, his work and thought were, and still are, of great importance. Today’s private international law would look different without him, both in the United States and in the rest of the world. At the same time, his approach to the field cannot be properly understood unless placed within his broader work on law, and the specific American background against which it was developed.
Chevron Bias, Philip A. Hamburger
Chevron Bias, Philip A. Hamburger
Faculty Scholarship
This Article takes a fresh approach to Chevron deference. Chevron requires judges to defer to agency interpretations of statutes and justifies this on a theory of statutory authorization for agencies. This Article, however, points to a pair of constitutional questions about the role of judges – questions that have not yet been adequately asked, let alone answered.
One question concerns independent judgment. Judges have a constitutional office or duty of independent judgment, under which they must exercise their own independent judgment about what the law is. Accordingly, when they defer to agency interpretations of the law, it must be asked …
Challenging The Randomness Of Panel Assignment In The Federal Courts Of Appeals, Adam S. Chilton, Marin K. Levy
Challenging The Randomness Of Panel Assignment In The Federal Courts Of Appeals, Adam S. Chilton, Marin K. Levy
Faculty Scholarship
A fundamental academic assumption about the federal courts of appeals is that the three-judge panels that hear cases have been randomly configured. Scores of scholarly articles have noted this “fact,” and it has been relied on heavily by empirical researchers. Even though there are practical reasons to doubt that judges would always be randomly assigned to panels, this assumption has never been tested. This Article fill this void by doing so.
To determine whether the circuit courts utilize random assignment, we have created what we believe to be the largest dataset of panel assignments of those courts constructed to date. …
Book Review: American Jericho: A Book Review Of The Hanging Judge By Michael A. Ponsor, Giovanna Shay
Book Review: American Jericho: A Book Review Of The Hanging Judge By Michael A. Ponsor, Giovanna Shay
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Judging Justice On Appeal, Marin K. Levy
Not "Special" Enough For Chapter 7: An Analysis Of The Special Circumstances Provision Of The Bankruptcy Code, Roma Perez
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Why Cant We Be Friends Preserving Public Confidence In The Judiciary Through Limited Use Of Social Networking, Helia Garrido Hull
Why Cant We Be Friends Preserving Public Confidence In The Judiciary Through Limited Use Of Social Networking, Helia Garrido Hull
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
What Real-World Criminal Cases Tell Us About Genetics Evidence, Deborah W. Denno
What Real-World Criminal Cases Tell Us About Genetics Evidence, Deborah W. Denno
Faculty Scholarship
This Article, which is part of a symposium on "Law and Ethics at the Frontier of Genetic Technology," examines an unprecedented experimental study published in Science. The Science study indicated that psychopathic criminal offenders were more likely to receive lighter sentences if a judge was aware of genetic and neurobiological explanations for the offender’s psychopathy. This Article contends that the study’s conclusions derive from substantial flaws in the study’s design and methodology. The hypothetical case upon which the study is based captures just one narrow and unrepresentative component of how genetic and neurobiological information operates, and the study suffers from …
A Fiduciary Theory Of Judging, Ethan J. Leib, David L. Ponet, Michael Serota
A Fiduciary Theory Of Judging, Ethan J. Leib, David L. Ponet, Michael Serota
Faculty Scholarship
For centuries, legal theorists and political philosophers have unsuccessfully sought a unified theory of judging able to account for the diverse, and oftentimes conflicting, responsibilities judges possess. This paper reveals how the law governing fiduciary relationships sheds new light on this age-old pursuit, and therefore, on the very nature of the judicial office itself. The paper first explores the routinely overlooked, yet deeply embedded historical provenance of our judges-as-fiduciaries framework in American political thought and in the framing of the U.S. Constitution. It then explains why a fiduciary theory of judging offers important insights into what it means to be …
Judicial Attention As A Scarce Resource: A Preliminary Defense Of How Judges Allocate Time Across Cases In The Federal Courts Of Appeals, Marin K. Levy
Faculty Scholarship
Federal appellate judges no longer have the time to hear argument and draft opinions in all of their cases. The average annual filing per active judgeship now stands at 330 filed cases per year — more than four times what it was sixty years ago. In response, judges have adopted case management strategies that effectively involve spending significantly less time on certain classes of cases than on others. Various scholars have decried this state of affairs, suggesting that the courts have created a “bifurcated” system of justice with “separate and unequal tracks.” These reformers propose altering the relevant constraints of …
What's On First?: Organizing The Casebook And Molding The Mind, Donald G. Gifford, Joseph L. Kroart Iii, Brian Jones, Cheryl Cortemeglia
What's On First?: Organizing The Casebook And Molding The Mind, Donald G. Gifford, Joseph L. Kroart Iii, Brian Jones, Cheryl Cortemeglia
Faculty Scholarship
This study empirically tests the proposition that law students adopt different conceptions of the judge’s role in adjudication based on whether they first study intentional torts, negligence, or strict liability. The authors conducted an anonymous survey of more than 450 students enrolled in eight law schools at the beginning, mid-point, and end of the first semester of law school. The students were prompted to indicate to what extent they believed the judge’s role to be one of rule application and, conversely, to what extent it was one of considering social, economic, and ideological factors. The survey found that while all …