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

Law Commons

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

1993

PDF

Journal

Courts

Mercer Law Review

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

In Re Grabill Corporation; Appeal Of Ncnb National Bank Of North Carolina: Four To One Against Jury Trials In Bankruptcy Courts, Merritt Mcgarrah Jul 1993

In Re Grabill Corporation; Appeal Of Ncnb National Bank Of North Carolina: Four To One Against Jury Trials In Bankruptcy Courts, Merritt Mcgarrah

Mercer Law Review

In In re Grabill Corporation; Appeal of NCNB National Bank of North Carolina, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals joined the majority of the federal circuits in holding that bankruptcy judges do not have the express or implied authority to conduct jury trials. When the Seventh Amendment grants the right to a jury trial, the district court must conduct the trial.


Nonacquiescence By The Social Security Administration As A Matter Of Law: Using Stieberger V. Sullivan As A Model, Jody L. Davis Jul 1993

Nonacquiescence By The Social Security Administration As A Matter Of Law: Using Stieberger V. Sullivan As A Model, Jody L. Davis

Mercer Law Review

Intracircuit nonacquiescence by an administrative agency is the "deliberate refusal to implement holdings in binding [circuit] court [of appeals] decisions in cases adjudicated before it." When a circuit court renders a decision that differs from the agency's schematic, the agency will either issue a formal declaration that it will not follow the circuit decision, or will silently disregard the decision and attempt to impress others that it is following the circuit's rule. The Social Security Administration's ("SSA") policy of intracircuit nonacquiescence in the Southern District of New York has been successfully challenged as being "inconsistent with the constitutionally required separation …


Article Ii Courts, David Bederman May 1993

Article Ii Courts, David Bederman

Mercer Law Review

It is understandable that a reader may be puzzled by the title of this study. American lawyers are undoubtedly familiar with the notion of "constitutional" courts established under Article III of the Constitution.1 They also are likely to recall another class of federal tribunals, created by virtue of the legislative authority vested in Congress by Article I of the Constitution.' However, few lawyers and scholars are aware that there exists a third class of courts created by the Constitution. These are executive courts that, from time to time in the Republic's history, have been formed to administer justice, in times …