Law Commons^™

The Legend Of "Crow Dog:" An Examination Of Jurisdiction Over Intra-Tribal Crimes Not Covered By The Major Crimes Act, James W. King

Vanderbilt Law Review

Native American tribes present unique problems to American jurisprudence and governance. Unquestionably subject to federal control on some levels, they have maintained the "inherent powers of a limited sovereignty" over internal affairs.' While both the Supreme Court and Congress have recognized this sovereignty, specific Congressional mandate can abrogate it at any time. This Note addresses the question of whether Congress has mandated federal jurisdiction over all serious crimes committed by Indians against other Indians on tribal land.

The story is long and complicated, with its beginnings in the 1883 Supreme Court case Ex parte Crow Dog, in which the Court …

Legislative Intent And Statutory Interpretation In England And The United States: An Assessment Of The Impact Of Pepper V. Hart, Michael P. Healy

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Statutory interpretation is the process of discerning the meaning of legislation, and U.S. law has permitted courts to find meaning through a variety of often contradictory interpretive approaches. As a result, U.S. litigants often are uncertain about the interpretive approach a court will apply to a statute, even though the choice of the interpretive approach may determine the outcome of the litigation. Until the recent decision in Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v. Hart, English approaches to statutory interpretation were more circumscribed because English courts foreclosed the intentionalist approach. This Article considers the impact that Pepper has had on statutory …

Right Result For The Wrong Reasons: Permitting Aggregation Of Claims Under 28 U.S.C. 1367 In Multi-Plaintiff Diversity Litigation, Mark C. Cawley Jr.

Notre Dame Law Review

No abstract provided.

Work Of Knowledge, Abner S. Greene

Notre Dame Law Review

No abstract provided.

Erisa Preemption Of Medical Malpractice Claims In Managed Care: Asserting A New Statutory Interpretation, Karla S. Bartholomew

Vanderbilt Law Review

If Congress wants the American citizens to have access to adequate health care, then Congress must accept its responsibility to define the scope of ERISA preemption and to enact legislation that will ensure every patient has access to that care.' Congress enacted the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA) to protect employee interests and ensure a uniform body of law for pension and benefit plans. The statute's expansive preemption clause and preclusion of extra-contractual damages have since been used to immunize Managed Care Organizations ("MCOs") from liability for patients injuries resulting from medical malpractice. Because plaintiffs with preempted …

United States V. Navistar Inernational Transportation Corp.: Seventh Circuit Bars Government's Cercla Claim Based On Violation Of The Statute Of Limitations, Brock Elliot Czeschin

Villanova Environmental Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Ninth Circuit's Decision In Oregon Natural Desert Association V. Dombeck: Discharging Responsibility For Water Pollution On Federal Lands, Christina Marie Frankino

Villanova Environmental Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Interpreting Indian Country In State Of Alaska V. Native Village Of Venetie, Kristen A. Carpenter

Publications

According to federal Indian law's canons of construction, statutes enacted for the benefit of American Indians and Alaska Natives must be liberally interpreted in their favor. But a doctrine of statutory interpretation presently challenges certain applications of the Indian canons. Announced by the Supreme Court in Chevron, U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., the doctrine requires that courts defer to administrative agency interpretations of ambiguous language in statutes they are authorized to administer. In instances where agencies construe statutes against Indian interests, Chevron deference and the Indian canons dictate opposite results for a reviewing court. This conflict muddles Indian …

No Vehicles In The Park, Pierre Schlag

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Common Law And Statutes, Peter L. Strauss

Faculty Scholarship

Controversies about statutory interpretation and the proper roles for judges in interpretation are particularly noticeable in the Supreme Court but have penetrated downward throughout the judicial system. What I mean to explore here are some implications of our common law heritage and the presuppositions of a common law system for these controversies, that seem rarely noticed in the ongoing debates. I mean by this not only common law judging, but also what we might call common law legislating – that is, the practice of creating statutes to achieve marginal changes in existing law in response to perceived deficiencies, rather than …