Law Commons^™

Natural Law, Slavery, And The Right To Privacy Tort, Anita L. Allen

All Faculty Scholarship

In 1905 the Supreme Court of Georgia became the first state high court to recognize a freestanding “right to privacy” tort in the common law. The landmark case was Pavesich v. New England Life Insurance Co. Must it be a cause for deep jurisprudential concern that the common law right to privacy in wide currency today originated in Pavesich’s explicit judicial interpretation of the requirements of natural law? Must it be an additional worry that the court which originated the common law privacy right asserted that a free white man whose photograph is published without his consent in …

Essay: Dicta, Schmicta: Theory Versus Practice In Lower Court Decision-Making, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 4,000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 2,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 4,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary assessment …

Dicta, Schmicta: Theory Versus Practice In Lower Court Decision-Making, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 4,000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 2,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 4,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary assessment …

Dicta, Schmicta: Theory Versus Practice In Lower Court Decision-Making, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 4,000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 2,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 4,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary assessment …

Federal Common Law And The Courts’ Regulation Of Pre-Litigation Preservation, Joshua Koppel

Joshua M. Koppel

With the proliferation in recent years of electronically stored information and the skyrocketing cost of retaining large amounts of data, issues of preservation have played an increasing role in litigation. Companies and individuals that anticipate that they will be involved in litigation in the future may be obligated to preserve relevant evidence even before litigation is initiated. Because litigation has not yet commenced, they cannot seek clarification regarding their obligations from a court or negotiate them with an adverse party. Statutory or common law preservation duties play a large role in guiding potential litigants in this area.

The federal courts …

Dicta, Schmicta: Theory Versus Practice In Lower Court Decision-Making, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 4,000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 2,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 4,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary assessment …

Dicta, Schmicta: Theory Versus Practice In Lower Court Decision-Making, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 4,000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 2,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 4,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary assessment …

Dicta, Schmicta: Theory Versus Practice In Lower Court Decision-Making, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 4,000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 2,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 4,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary assessment …

Dicta, Schmicta: Theory Versus Practice In Lower Court Decision-Making, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 4,000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 2,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 4,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary assessment …

Dicta, Schmicta: Theory Versus Practice In Lower Court Decision-Making, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 4,000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 2,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 4,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary assessment …

Dicta, Schmicta: Theory Versus Practice In Lower Court Decision-Making, Neal E. Devins, David Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 4,000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 2,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 4,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary assessment …

Dicta, Schmicta: Theory Versus Practice In Lower Court Decision-Making, Neal E. Devins, David Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 4,000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 2,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 4,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary assessment …

The Case Of The Retired Justice: How Would Justice John Paul Stevens Have Voted In J. Mcintyre Machinery, Ltd. V. Nicastro?, Rodger D. Citron

Rodger Citron

No abstract provided.

The Use Of The Public Trust Doctrine As A Management Tool Over Public And Private Lands, Patricia E. Salkin

Patricia E. Salkin

No abstract provided.

Punishment Without Culpability, John F. Stinneford

UF Law Faculty Publications

For more than half a century, academic commentators have criticized the Supreme Court for failing to articulate a substantive constitutional conception of criminal law. Although the Court enforces various procedural protections that the Constitution provides for criminal defendants, it has left the question of what a crime is purely to the discretion of the legislature. This failure has permitted legislatures to evade the Constitution’s procedural protections by reclassifying crimes as civil causes of action, eliminating key elements (such as mens rea) or reclassifying them as defenses or sentencing factors, and authorizing severe punishments for crimes traditionally considered relatively minor.

The …

How Equity Conquered Common Law: The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure In Historical Perspective, Stephen Subrin

Stephen N. Subrin

Part I of this Article first looks at the major components of common law and equity procedure, and then examines the domination of an equity mentality in the Federal Rules. Part II explores the American procedural experience before the twentieth century, and demonstrates how David Dudley Field and his 1848 New York Code were tied to a common law procedural outlook. Part III concentrates on Roscoe Pound (who initiated the twentieth century procedural reform effort), Thomas Shelton (who led the American Bar Association Enabling Act Movement), and Charles Clark (the major draftsman of the Federal Rules). Through understanding these men …

Contract Law, Chao-Hung Christopher Chen

Christopher Chao-hung Chen

No abstract provided.

Federal Common Law And The Courts’ Regulation Of Pre-Litigation Preservation, Joshua Koppel

Joshua M. Koppel

With the proliferation in recent years of electronically stored information and the skyrocketing cost of retaining large amounts of data, issues of preservation have played an increasing role in litigation. Companies and individuals that anticipate that they will be involved in litigation in the future may be obligated to preserve relevant evidence even before litigation is initiated. Because litigation has not yet commenced, they cannot seek clarification regarding their obligations from a court or negotiate them with an adverse party. Statutory or common law preservation duties play a large role in guiding potential litigants in this area.

The federal courts …

The Power To Bind: Dicta In Theory And Practice, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 5, 000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary …

The Power To Bind: Dicta In Theory And Practice, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 5, 000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary …

The Power To Bind: Dicta In Theory And Practice, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 5, 000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary …

The Power To Bind: Dicta In Theory And Practice, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 5, 000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary …

The Corners Of The Common Law: Creating Causes Of Action, Kelly Kunsch

Kelly Kunsch

The common law is notoriously slow-moving. On rare occasions, however, courts have made dramatic changes, creating entirely new causes of action where none previously existed. This article analyzes decisions that have made those changes to see how the courts justified their actions. The article begins by describing how visions of the common law have changed with time. It then discusses the relationship of legislation to common law, looking at cases where the two interact. After that, the article looks at decisions that made significant changes in the common law outside of any statutory framework. Finally, the article points out commonalities …

The Power To Bind: Dicta In Theory And Practice, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 5, 000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary …

The Power To Bind: Dicta In Theory And Practice, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 5, 000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary …

The Power To Bind: Dicta In Theory And Practice, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 5, 000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary …

The Power To Bind: Dicta In Theory And Practice, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 5, 000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary …

The Power To Bind: Dicta In Theory And Practice, Neal E. Devins, David E. Klein

Neal E. Devins

The distinction between dicta and holding is at once central to the American legal system and largely irrelevant. In the first systematic empirical study of lower court invocations of the distinction, we show that lower courts hardly ever refuse to follow a statement from a higher court because it is dicta. Specifically, federal court of appeals meaningfully invoke the distinction in about 1 in 5, 000 cases; federal district courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases; and state courts in about 1 in 3,000 cases. In this essay, we report these findings, describe our coding system, and offer a preliminary …

D & O Insurance: A Primer, Lawrence J. Trautman, Kara Altenbaumer-Price

American University Business Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Backdrops, Stephen E. Sachs

Stephen E. Sachs

The Constitution is often said to leave important questions unanswered. These include, for example, the existence of a congressional contempt power or an executive removal power, the role of stare decisis, and the scope of state sovereign immunity. Bereft of clear text, many scholars have sought answers to such questions in Founding-era history. But why should the historical answers be valid today, if they were never codified in the Constitution's text? This Article describes a category of legal rules that weren't adopted in the text, expressly or implicitly, but which nonetheless have continuing legal force under the written Constitution. These …