Law Commons^™

Sufficiency Of The Evidence Does Not Meet Daubert Standards: A Critique Of The Green-Sanders Proposal, Aaron Twerski, Lior Sapir

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Future War, Future Law, Eric Talbot Jensen

Faculty Scholarship

Advancing technology will dramatically affect the weapons and tactics of future armed conflict, including the “places” where conflicts are fought, the “actors” by whom they are fought, and the “means and methods” by which they are fought. These changes -- including continuing cyber conflict, increased use of autonomous weapon systems, the development of nanotechnology, and evolving virology capabilities -- will stress even the fundamental principles of the law of armed conflict, or LOAC. While it is likely that the contemporary LOAC will be sufficient to regulate the majority of future conflicts, the international community must be willing to evolve the …

Guantanamo And The End Of Hostilities, Eric Talbot Jensen

Faculty Scholarship

Detainees in the War on Terror have been at Guantanamo Bay for over a decade. The justification for these detentions has been, at least in part, the on-going hostilities in Afghanistan. However, President Obama’s announcement in his 2013 State of the Union address that “By the end of [2014] our war in Afghanistan will be over” may undercut the continuing detention authority for at least some of these Guantanamo detainees. This paper analyzes the legal doctrine of release and repatriation in light of President Obama’s announcement and concludes that the President’s determination that hostilities have concluded between specific Parties to …

Ruth B. Hardy Revocable Trust, Et Al., Plaintiffs And Appellants, Vs. Mark Lee Rindlesback, Individually And As Trustee Of The Rindlesback Construction, Inc. Profit Sharing Plan, Defendants And Appellees : Brief Of Appellees, Utah Court Of Appeals

Utah Court of Appeals Briefs (2007– )

Appeal from the Third Judicial District Court of Salt Lake County The Honorable Deno Himonas

State Of Utah, Plaintiff/Appellee, V. John E. Hummel, Defendant/Appellant, Utah Supreme Court

Utah Supreme Court Briefs (2000– )

Apppeal from convictions for theft, two third-degree and two second-degree felonies; attempted theft, a third-degree felony; and theft by deception, a second-degree felony, in the Sixth Judicial District, Garfield County, the Honorable James R. Taylor presiding

State Of Utah, Plaintiff/Appellee, Vs. John E. Hummel, Defendant/Appellant, Utah Court Of Appeals

Utah Court of Appeals Briefs (2007– )

Appeal from convictions of two counts of theft by extortion, alternatively charged as theft by deception, each a second degree felony, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-406 or, alternatively, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-405; a conviction of one count of theft by deception, a second degree felony, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-405; a conviction of one count of theft by extortion, alternatively charged as theft by deception, a third degree felony, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-406 or, alternatively, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-405; and a conviction …

The Birth Of The Greenback, Dawinder S. Sidhu

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Amicus Curiae Labor Law Professors In Support Of Respondents, Fred T. Korematsu Center For Law And Equality

Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality

Pamela Harris et al. v. Pat Quinn, Governor of Illinois et al.

Golden Gate University's 14 New Year's Resolutions For Law Schools In 2014, Wes R. Porter

Publications

New Year's resolution-making isn't just for people, but should be a requirement for higher education, particularly law schools, according to Professor Wes Porter, Director of Golden Gate University's Law Litigation Center. "Law schools that continually embrace fresh teaching techniques graduate the smartest students possible," says Professor Porter. To help law schools kick-start 2014, he offers 14 New Year's Resolutions for Law Schools.

Distributive Justice And Consumer Welfare In Antitrust, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Carey Law

The dominant view of antitrust policy in the United States is that it is intended to promote some version of economic welfare. More specifically, antitrust promotes allocative efficiency by ensuring that markets are as competitive as they can practicably be, and that firms do not face unreasonable roadblocks to attaining productive efficiency, which refers to both cost minimization and innovation.

The distribution concern that has dominated debates over United States antitrust policy over the last several decades is whether antitrust should adopt a “consumer welfare” principle rather than a more general neoclassical “total welfare” principle. In The Antitrust Paradox Robert …

Patent Exclusions And Antitrust After Therasense, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Carey Law

A patent may be held invalid if it was obtained by “inequitable conduct” before the PTO during the process of patent prosecution. In its Therasense decision the Federal Circuit imposed severe requirements against those attempting to defend against a patent on the basis of inequitable conduct, insisting that inequitable conduct be measured essentially by a subjective test. Objective “reasonable person” tests such as negligence or even gross negligence will not suffice. By contrast, the Supreme Court has insisted that the conduct giving rise to a wrongful infringement action violating the antitrust laws be initially based on an objective test – …

Innovation And Competition Policy, Ch. 9 (2d Ed): The Innovation Commons, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Carey Law

This book of CASES AND MATERIALS ON INNOVATION AND COMPETITION POLICY is intended for educational use. The book is free for all to use subject to an open source license agreement. It differs from IP/antitrust casebooks in that it considers numerous sources of competition policy in addition to antitrust, including those that emanate from the intellectual property laws themselves, and also related issues such as the relationship between market structure and innovation, the competitive consequences of regulatory rules governing technology competition such as net neutrality and interconnection, misuse, the first sale doctrine, and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Chapters …

Competition For Innovation, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Carey Law

Both antitrust and IP law are limited and imperfect instruments for regulating innovation. The problems include high information costs and lack of sufficient knowledge, special interest capture, and the jury trial system, to name a few. More fundamentally, antitrust law and intellectual property law have looked at markets in very different ways. Further, over the last three decades antitrust law has undergone a reformation process that has made it extremely self conscious about its goals. While the need for such reform is at least as apparent in patent and copyright law, very little true reform has actually occurred.

Antitrust has …

Judge Pauley’S Opinion In Clapper: Reset Button For Bulk Collection Debate?, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

This article was originally found in Lawfare, available here: https://www.lawfareblog.com/judge-pauleys-opinion-clapper-reset-button-bulk-collection-debate

Human Rights Pragmatism And Human Dignity, David Luban

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Human rights sound a lot like moral rights: rights that we have because we are human. Many philosophers think it follows that the list of international human rights must therefore be founded on some philosophical account of moral rights or of human dignity. More recently, other philosophers have rejected this foundationalist picture of international human rights (“foundationalist” meaning that moral rights are the foundation of international human rights). These critics argue that international human rights need no philosophical foundation; instead, we should look to the actual practices of human rights: the practices of international institutions, tribunals, NGOs, monitors, and activists. …

Summary Of Lytle V. Rosemere Estate Prop. Owners, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 98, Allison Vitangeli

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined two issues: (1) whether an NRCP 59(e) motion to alter or amend may be properly directed at a post-judgment order or whether that rule is limited to final judgments; and (2) whether NRAP 4(a)(4) tolling applied to the appellants’ NRCP 59(e) motion.

Serious Discussions Needed On Police Tactics And False Confessions, Marc D. Falkoff

College of Law Faculty Publications

It’s a phenomenon that detectives, prosecutors, jurors and even defense lawyers typically have trouble believing: Sometimes suspects will confess to serious crimes even when they are completely innocent. “I certainly wouldn’t confess to a crime I didn’t commit!” we all think. But false confessions happen all the time and recent DNA exonerations and psychological studies suggest they occur more frequently than anyone involved with the criminal justice system should tolerate. Journalists and academic researchers increasingly understand how the typical police interrogation in the United States is structured to elicit confessions rather than gather accurate information about a crime. The techniques …

Summary Of In Re Nilsson, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 101, Keivan Roebuck

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined whether a debtor may claim Nevada’s homestead exemption when he does not reside on the property but his minor children do.

Summary Of State V. Kincade, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 102, Shaina Plaksin

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined whether the district court properly excluded evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant that did not comply with NRS 179.045(5) because it failed to include either a statement of probable cause or the affidavit upon which probable cause was based.

Summary Of Taylor V. Nev. Dept. Of Health And Human Servs., 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 99, Whitney E. Short

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined one issue: whether it is within a hearing officer’s duty to determine the appropriate level of discipline and impose that determination.

Summary Of Dogra V. Liles, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 100, Jeff Scarborough

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined three issues: (1) whether a nonresident defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction in Nevada when the sole basis asserted is her adult child’s unilateral act of driving the defendant’s vehicle in Nevada; (2) whether a defendant’s filing of a motion to consolidate in a Nevada court waived her right to object to the court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over her; and (3) whether an interpleader action filed by a defendant’s car insurance company subjects its insured to personal jurisdiction in Nevada.

Brief For The American Association On Intellectual And Developmental Disabilities, The Arc Of The United States, The National Disability Rights Network, Disability Rights Florida, And The Bazelon Center For Mental Health Law As Amicus Curiae, April Land, James W. Ellis, Ann M. Delpha, Carol M. Suzuki, Steven K. Homer

Faculty Scholarship

Question Presented: Whether the Florida scheme for identifying mentally retarded defendants in capital cases violates Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002). Summary of Argument: In Atkins, this Court concluded that a national consensus had developed against the execution of persons with mental retardation and that such executions violated the Eighth Amendment. The Court also stated that the national consensus suggests that some characteristics of mental retardation, such as disabilities in the areas of reasoning, judgment, and control of impulses, undermine the procedural protections of our capital punishment jurisprudence and can jeopardize the reliability and fairness of capital proceedings against …

Medtronic V. Boston Scientific: Allocating The Burden Of Proof In Declaratory Judgment Actions For Patent Non-Infringement, Brianna Strange

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Medtronic, Inc. v. Boston Scientific Corporation, in which the Court will decide which party bears the burden of proof in a declaratory judgment action for patent non-infringement.

Tetris Holding V. Xio Interactive Isn’T As Great A Case As Video Game Developers Think It Is, Sam Castree Iii

AELJ Blog

Advances in technology have once again allowed a lone individual, or a small group, to create video games and get them out to the world. I have previously written on the growing problem of cyber-plagiarism – thieves completely copying the works of others and selling them via digital distribution in major online retailers. However, there are many other cases in which games are not blatantly stolen. Sometimes, game developers will merely take inspiration from an existing game, or even make completely coincidental similarities. Fortunately, judges have at their disposal a robust body of law dealing with the copyright’s idea/expression dichotomy, …

Order On Defendant's Motion To Dismiss (Mary Ann Digan Et Al.), Elizabeth E. Long

Georgia Business Court Opinions

No abstract provided.

Joe Bauer Presented "Enforcement Issues Under American Antitrust Laws" At The University Of Tilburg (Holland) Center For Law And Economics On December 19, 2013, Joseph P. Bauer

Faculty Lectures and Presentations

Joe Bauer presented a seminar at the University of Tilburg (Holland) Center for Law and Economics on December 19. His topic was Enforcement Issues under American Antitrust Laws. View PowerPoint slides of lecture by clicking pdf link.

Blame Congress, Not Prosecutors, For The Absurdity Of Mandatory Minimums, Wes R. Porter

Publications

Contrary to public perception, prosecutors do not "coerce" or "threaten" otherwise innocent people to plead guilty using mandatory minimum sentences. "Mandatory minimums," as they are called, are minimum terms of imprisonment for specific offenses imposed by statute instead of a judge. Judge John Gleeson of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York joined the chorus of critics in an October 2013 court statement, when he said that "[p]rosecutors routinely threaten ultra-harsh, enhanced mandatory sentences that no one - not even the prosecutors themselves - thinks are appropriate." Of course, some federal prosecutors do act badly - …

Summary Of In Re Aboud Inter Vivos Trust, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 97, Emily Anderson

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined two issues: (1) whether NRS 164.010(1) and NRS 164.015(6) give the court in rem jurisdiction to impose a constructive trust on previous trust property; and (2) whether a district court may grant a monetary judgment against former trustees and third parties that was based on the district court’s in rem jurisdiction.

Desperately Seeking Substance (Not Slogans) In Review Group Report On Nsa Surveillance, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Geopolitics Of Election Approval: The Us Response To Honduras And Venezuela, Lauren Carasik, Susan Scott, Azadeh Shahshahani

Media Presence

No abstract provided.