Law Commons^™

Standing Room Only: Why Fourth Amendment Exclusion And Standing Can No Longer Logically Coexist, Sherry F. Colb

Sherry Colb

No abstract provided.

The Week After, Lawrence K. Karlton

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Taxpayers’ Lack Of Standing In International Tax Dispute Resolutions: An Analysis Based On The Hybrid Norms Of International Taxation, Limor Riza

Pace Law Review

This paper examines whether a taxpayer should have “standing” in international dispute resolutions. To answer this question the primary task is to identify the nature of international taxation. In other words, this paper discusses how to classify the field of international taxation. Is it part of public international law, private international law (i.e., conflict of laws), national (domestic) law, or is it a hybrid field that requires specific attention? Making this distinction is vital for resolving disputes when a taxpayer is taxed twice for cross-border transactions in cases where the double tax convention is unclear and both contracting states claim …

Reexamining The Seventh Amendment Argument Against Issue Certification, Douglas Mcnamara, Blake Boghosian, Leila Aminpour

Pace Law Review

Issue certification does not run afoul of the Seventh Amendment because of the constitutional doctrines of standing and ripeness. Part II(A) and II(B) examines FRCP 23 and the history of class actions and issue certifications. Next, Part II(C) analyzes Rhone Poulenc and its Seventh Amendment analysis. Part III(A) argues that ripeness and standing undermine Seventh Amendment arguments concerning reexamination. First, as to ripeness, the reexamination argument relies on a series of speculations: that the class plaintiffs will prevail on the trial of the common issues; and that a second jury would—contrary to legal presumptions — ignore the trial judge’s instructions, …

Reexamining The Role Of Illinois Brick In Modern Antitrust Standing Analysis, Jeffrey Harrison

Jeffrey L Harrison

This Article argues that it is time for either the Court or Congress to reexamine Illinois Brick for the purpose of reconciling it with more general principles of antitrust standing. The overall goals of such an endeavor would be to ensure consistent treatment of similarly situated potential plaintiffs and to rationalize private antitrust enforcement.

Court Of Appeals Of New York, Consumers Union Of United States, Inc. V. New York, Daphne Vlcek

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

County Court, Westchester County, People V. Gant, Albert V. Messina Jr.

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

City Court, City Of Rochester, People V. Barton, Kerri Grzymala

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appellate Division, Second Department, Langan V. St. Vincent's Hospital Of New York, Christin Harris

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Civil Practice And Procedure, Andrew P. Sherrod, Jaime B. Wisegarver

University of Richmond Law Review

This article surveys recent significant developments in Virginia civil practice and procedure. Part I of this article discusses opinions of the Supreme Court of Virginia from June 2013 through June 2014 addressing noteworthy civil procedure topics. Part II addresses amendments to the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia concerning procedural issues during the same period. PartIII discusses legislation enacted by the Virginia General Assembly during its 2014 session that relates to civil practice.

How To Make Sense Of Supreme Court Standing Cases— – A Plea For The Right Kind Of Realism, Richard H. Fallon Jr.

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Does The Supreme Court Ignore Standing Problems To Reach The Merits? Evidence (Or Lack Thereof) From The Roberts Court, Heather Elliott

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Standing And The Role Of Federal Courts: Triple Error Decisions In Clapper V. Amnesty International Usa And City Of Los Angeles V. Lyons, Vicki C. Jackson

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Governmental Sovereignty Actions, Ann Woolhandler

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

“Standing” In The Shadow Of Erie: Federalism In The Balance In Hollingsworth V. Perry, Glenn S. Koppel

Pace Law Review

This Article provides an insight into the Court’s divergent views on the federal standing issue in Hollingsworth by viewing the Justices’ conflicting positions through the lens of the Court’s Erie jurisprudence, which, at its core, focuses on calibrating the proper judicial balance of power in a given case between conflicting federal and state interests in determining vertical choice-of-law issues. Hollingsworth is uniquely positioned at the intersection of federal standing principles and Erie doctrine, confronting the Court with competing balance of power concerns inherent in our federal system. Standing, as a requirement for the limited exercise of federal judicial power under …

The Child Client: Representing Children In Child Protective Proceedings, Merril Sobie

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Burton, Diane Matero

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Procedure Decisions From The October 2006 Term, Susan N. Herman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Banks And Federal Jurisdiction In The Progressive Era, Larry Yackle

Faculty Scholarship

This is a case study of the Supreme Court’s classic decision in Smith v. K.C. Title & Trust Co. A stockholder challenged the constitutionality of the Farm Loan Act of 1916, which authorized federal banks to issue tax-exempt bonds to raise funds for loans to farmers. The case is best known for its holding that a federal court could entertain the suit because it arose “under the Constitution” and for Justice Holmes’ argument, in dissent, that federal jurisdiction was not established because state law created the “cause of action.”

This study is the first to go beyond the jurisdictional issue …

Standing” On Formality: Hollingsworth V. Perry And The Efficacy Of Direct Democracy In The United States, Matthew A. Melone

Matthew A. Melone

No abstract provided.

Don’T Ask, Don’T Tell: Hollingsworth V. Perry And The Constitutional Right To Same-Sex Marriage – The Court Didn’T Tell By Denying The People The Right To Ask, Matthew A. Melone, George A. Nation Iii

Matthew A. Melone

No abstract provided.

No Article Iii Standing For Private Plaintiffs Challenging State Greenhouse Gas Regulations: The Ninth Circuit's Decision In Washington Environmental Council V. Bellon, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In Washington Environmental Council v. Bellon, the Ninth Circuit recently held that private plaintiffs did not have standing to sue in federal court to challenge certain state greenhouse gas (GHG) regulations because the plaintiffs failed to allege that the emissions were significant enough to make a “meaningful contribution” to global GHG levels. By contrast, in Massachusetts v. EPA, the Supreme Court held a state government had standing to sue the federal government for its failure to regulate national GHG emissions because states are “entitled to special solicitude in our standing analysis.” Massachusetts implied but did not decide that private parties …

Is Prudential Standing Jurisdictional?, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

The Supreme Court has clearly treated the Constitution’s Article III standing requirements as mandatory jurisdictional hurdles that a plaintiff must meet for each form of relief sought before federal courts may consider the merits of a case. But the Supreme Court has never squarely held that prudential standing is a jurisdictional issue that must be decided before the merits in every single case. A 1975 Supreme Court decision suggested in dicta that prudential standing doctrine plays a crucial role in preventing federal courts from addressing political questions, but a 1984 Court decision implied in dicta that prudential standing is less …

Clapper V. Amnesty International: Two Or Three Competing Philosophies Of Standing Law?, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In its 2013 decision Clapper v. Amnesty International, the Supreme Court invoked separation of powers principles in holding that public interest groups alleging that the Government was spying on their foreign clients failed to demonstrate Article III standing because they could not prove that the future surveillance injury that they purportedly feared was “certainly impending.” Justice Breyer’s dissenting opinion argued “commonsense” suggested that the Government was spying on the plaintiffs’ foreign clients and proposed a “reasonable” or “high” probability standing test. Implicitly, the Clapper decision presented a third approach to standing decisions. In footnote 5, the majority opinion acknowledged that …

Private Ownership And The Standing To Say So, Avihay Dorfman

Avihay Dorfman

Property theory is an ongoing discourse attempting to articulate a compelling answer (or answers) to the following question: what is the single most significant or otherwise interesting thing about the concept of private ownership? In this article, I seek to advance three general claims in response to this question. First, I criticize certain leading attempts to answer this question. Second, the centerpiece of my article defends the claim that an adequate theory of the concept of private ownership must begin with the special standing that an owner possesses, which is to say the standing to demand that others will take …

Article Iii And Bankruptcy Code Standing: Preserving A Party’S Right To Object To A Proposed Reorganization Plan, James Scahill

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

In a chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding, a troubled company can either restructure or liquidate through a confirmed chapter 11 plan. To encourage more participation in reorganization cases, courts have broadly interpreted section 1109(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, which determines who may object to a plan. Section 1109(b) states that “a party in interest, including the debtor, the trustee, a creditors’ committee, an equity security holders’ committee, a creditor, an equity security holder, or any indenture trustee, may raise and may appear and be heard on any issue in a case under this chapter.” A party wishing to object to …

Preserving Preservation: Long Green Valley Association, Conservation Easements, And Charitable Trust Doctrine, Alyssa J. Domzal

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Clapper V. Amnesty International Usa: Allowing The Fisa Amendments Act Of 2008 To Turn "Incidentally" Into "Certainly", Liz Clark Rinehart

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Prudential Third Party Standing Of Family-Owned Corporations, Matthew I. Hall, Benjamin Means

Scholarly Works

On November 26, 2013, the Supreme Court agreed to decide whether for-profit corporations or their shareholders have standing to challenge federal regulations that implement the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). At issue in the two cases consolidated for appeal, Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties, are regulations mandating that employers with fifty or more employees offer health insurance that includes coverage for all contraceptives approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The plaintiffs assert that providing certain types of contraceptive care would be contrary to their religious beliefs and allege, therefore, that the mandate violates the Religious …