Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 12 of 12
Full-Text Articles in Law
Cooperative Agreements: Government-To-Government Relations To Foster Reservation Business Development, Joel H. Mack, Gwyn Goodson Timms
Cooperative Agreements: Government-To-Government Relations To Foster Reservation Business Development, Joel H. Mack, Gwyn Goodson Timms
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Federal Judicial And Legislative Jurisdiction Over Entities Abroad: The Long-Arm Of U.S. Antitrust Law And Viable Solutions Beyond The Timberlane/Restatement Comity Approach, Michael G. Mckinnon
Federal Judicial And Legislative Jurisdiction Over Entities Abroad: The Long-Arm Of U.S. Antitrust Law And Viable Solutions Beyond The Timberlane/Restatement Comity Approach, Michael G. Mckinnon
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Amicus Brief In Support Of Neither Party In Sebelius V. Auburn Reg. Med. Ctr., No. 11-1231, Scott Dodson
Amicus Brief In Support Of Neither Party In Sebelius V. Auburn Reg. Med. Ctr., No. 11-1231, Scott Dodson
Scott Dodson
This amicus brief in support of neither party in the merits case of Sebelius v. Auburn Regional Medical Center, No. 11-1231, urges the Supreme Court to decide the question presented (whether 42 U.S.C. § 1395oo(a)(3) permits equitable tolling) without resort to jurisdictional labels.
Wrong, Out Of Step, And Pernicious: Erie As The Worst Decision Of All Time, Suzanna Sherry
Wrong, Out Of Step, And Pernicious: Erie As The Worst Decision Of All Time, Suzanna Sherry
Pepperdine Law Review
This essay was written for “Supreme Mistakes: Exploring the Most Maligned Decisions in Supreme Court History.” A symposium on the worst Supreme Court decision of all time risks becoming an exercise best described by Claude Rains’s memorable line in Casablanca: “Round up the usual suspects.” Two things saved this symposium from that fate. First, each of the usual suspects was appointed defense counsel, which made things more interesting. Second, a new face found its way into the line-up: Erie Railroad v. Tompkins. My goal in this essay is to explain why Erie is in fact guiltier than all of the …
Hypothetical Jurisdiction And Interjurisdictional Preclusion: A "Comity" Of Errors, Ely Todd Chayet
Hypothetical Jurisdiction And Interjurisdictional Preclusion: A "Comity" Of Errors, Ely Todd Chayet
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Post-Iqbal State Of Pleading: An Argument Opposing A Uniform National Pleading Regime, Mark W. Payne
The Post-Iqbal State Of Pleading: An Argument Opposing A Uniform National Pleading Regime, Mark W. Payne
University of Miami Business Law Review
The U.S. Supreme Court's 2009 decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal placed a squeeze on the once touted liberal Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by requiring judges to consider the veracity of potential plaintiffs' federal claims in light of Iqbal's new heightened pleading standard. This article examines post-Iqbal pleading standards across United States jurisdictions and argues that states should exert caution before choosing to adopt Iqbal's new "plausibility" standard, and if they elect to modify their pleading standards in light of the Iqbal decision, they should also carefully contemplate their method of adoption.
Court Reform And Breathing Space Under The Establishment Clause, Mark C. Rahdert
Court Reform And Breathing Space Under The Establishment Clause, Mark C. Rahdert
Chicago-Kent Law Review
Flast v. Cohen held that federal taxpayers have standing to challenge government spending for religion. While Frothingham v. Mellon generally prohibits taxpayer standing in federal courts, the Court reasoned that the Establishment Clause specifically prohibits taxation in any amount to fund unconstitutional religious spending. For several decades Flast has been settled law that supplied jurisdiction in many leading establishment cases. But Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. and Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn signal that Flast may soon be overruled. This jurisdictional ferment raises two questions: Why this sudden shift? And what does it signify for the …
Reading The Standing Tea Leaves In American Electric Power V. Connecticut, Bradford Mank
Reading The Standing Tea Leaves In American Electric Power V. Connecticut, Bradford Mank
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
In American Electric Power v. Connecticut (AEP), the U.S. Supreme Court by an equally divided vote of four to four affirmed the Second Circuit’s decision finding standing and jurisdiction in the case. Even though it did not announce the identities of the justices who voted for standing and against standing, the AEP decision took the unusual step of providing some explanation for how the Court divided on the standing question, and, as a result, provided important information about the positions of the justices on the issue. While it is not binding as a decision for the lower courts except …
Proof Of Classwide Injury, Sergio J. Campos
Untangling Jurisdiction And Contract Scope Issues Within Intellectual Property Licenses, Brandon Beam
Untangling Jurisdiction And Contract Scope Issues Within Intellectual Property Licenses, Brandon Beam
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
Copyright license cases pose difficult issues regarding the mixture of federal copyright law and state contract law for courts and commentators alike. Specifically, a split exists over which cases "arise under" federal copyright law. This complication is compounded by the difficulty in predicting federal preemption of state contract law.
In an effort to stabilize these complications, this comment recommends an approach of split sovereignty that would empower different systems to control the areas they are designated to regulate. In particular, the author suggests that procedural issues in copyright license cases should be clarified by (1) governing exclusive federal jurisdiction under …
Access-To-Justice Analysis On A Due Process Platform, Ronald A. Brand
Access-To-Justice Analysis On A Due Process Platform, Ronald A. Brand
Articles
In their article, Forum Non Conveniens and The Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Christopher Whytock and Cassandra Burke Robertson provide a wonderful ride through the landscape of the law of both forum non convenience and judgments recognition and enforcement. They explain doctrinal development and current case law clearly and efficiently, in a manner that educates, but does not overburden, the reader. Based upon that explanation, they then provide an analysis of both areas of the law and offer suggestions for change. Those suggestions, they tell us, are necessary to close the “transnational access-to-justice gap” that results from apparent differences between rules …
Structuring Jurisdictional Rules And Standards, Scott Dodson, Elizabeth Mccuskey
Structuring Jurisdictional Rules And Standards, Scott Dodson, Elizabeth Mccuskey
Scott Dodson