Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Extraterritoriality (2)
- Bankruptcy (1)
- Brecht v. Abrahamson (1)
- Capital convictions (1)
- Case of the S.S. "Lotus" (1)
-
- Chapter 15 (1)
- Choice of law (1)
- Circuit split (1)
- Creditors (1)
- Debtors (1)
- Errors (1)
- F. Hoffmann-LaRoche Ltd. v. Empagran S.A. (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Federal question jurisdiction (1)
- Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act (1)
- Foreign plaintiffs (1)
- Forum shopping (1)
- France (1)
- Habeas corpus (1)
- Harm (1)
- Harmless errors (1)
- History (1)
- In re Axona Int'l Credit & Commerce Ltd. (1)
- In re Maruko Inc. (1)
- Incorporation (1)
- Insolvency (1)
- International Court of Justice (1)
- Judicial interpretation (1)
- Jurisdiction stripping (1)
- Kotteakos v. United States (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Keeping The Door Ajar For Foreign Plaintiffs In Global Cartel Cases After Empagran, Jeremy M. Suhr
Keeping The Door Ajar For Foreign Plaintiffs In Global Cartel Cases After Empagran, Jeremy M. Suhr
Michigan Law Review
In many ways, the Supreme Court's opinion of F. Hoffmann-LaRoche Ltd. V. Empagran S.A. raised more questions than it answered. Growing out of the massive international vitamins cartel uncovered in the 1990s, Empagran presented a scenario in which all parties were foreign and all conduct occurred abroad. Although it is "well established by now that the Sherman Act applies to foreign conduct that was meant to produce and did in fact produce some substantial effect in the United States," Empagran presented the Court with the first truly foreign antitrust case. It involved not only foreign conduct, but also foreign plaintiffs …
Mostly Harmless: An Analysis Of Post-Aedpa Federal Habeas Corpus Review Of State Harmless Error Determinations, Jeffrey S. Jacobi
Mostly Harmless: An Analysis Of Post-Aedpa Federal Habeas Corpus Review Of State Harmless Error Determinations, Jeffrey S. Jacobi
Michigan Law Review
Sixty years ago, in Kotteakos v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that a small class of so-called harmless errors committed by courts did not require correction. The Court acknowledged that some judicial errors, though recognizable as errors, did not threaten the validity of criminal convictions and therefore did not quite require reversal. Specifically, the Court held that errors that violated federal statutes should be deemed harmless unless they had a "substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict." While Kotteakos represented the Supreme Court's first treatment of the concept of harmlessness, other courts had a …
The Lotus Principle In Icj Jurisprudence: Was The Ship Ever Afloat?, Hugh Handeyside
The Lotus Principle In Icj Jurisprudence: Was The Ship Ever Afloat?, Hugh Handeyside
Michigan Journal of International Law
But Lotus has perhaps drawn as much criticism as affirmation. Ian Brownlie observes that "[i]n most respects the Judgment of the Court is unhelpful in its approach to the principles of jurisdiction, and its pronouncements are characterized by vagueness and generality." Nor does there appear to be any clear consensus on the decision's core holdings; in fact, commentators have read the decision in alarmingly divergent ways. This Note avoids the legal cacophony surrounding the specific holdings of the Lotus decision, focusing instead on the Lotus principle. Scholars have persistently (and often uncritically) taken the Lotus principle at face value, citing …
The Puzzle Of Complete Preemption, Gil Seinfeld
The Puzzle Of Complete Preemption, Gil Seinfeld
Articles
Part I introduces the central themes in the law of federal question jurisdiction. It describes the prevailing interpretations of the constitutional and statutory texts governing the federal courts' jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes involving questions of federal law, and it explores the reasons for the establishment of such jurisdiction. This Part also introduces the well-pleaded complaint rule and examines the reasons for its adoption by the Supreme Court. Part II provides a detailed account of complete preemption doctrine, under which parties are permitted to usher state-law claims into the federal courts despite the apparent absence of any federal question on the …
The Myth (And Realities) Of Forum Shopping In Transnational Insolvency, John A. E. Pottow
The Myth (And Realities) Of Forum Shopping In Transnational Insolvency, John A. E. Pottow
Articles
A decade ago, in 1996, the landscape of transnational insolvencies was vastly different from today. The UNCITRAL Model Law had not been finished, the efforts at the E.U. Insolvency Treaty were jeopardized by mad cows, and no one had heard of Chapter 15. Now, all three universalist projects are up and running, putting universalism in a comfortable state of ascendancy. The paradigm has not been without critics, however, the most persistent and eloquent of which has been Professor Lynn LoPucki. LoPucki has periodically attacked universalism on a number of grounds. These grievances include a sovereigntist complaint of universalism's insensitivity to …