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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Keeping The Door Ajar For Foreign Plaintiffs In Global Cartel Cases After Empagran, Jeremy M. Suhr Feb 2007

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 Feb 2007

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 Jan 2007

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 …