Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (52)
- First Amendment (10)
- Supreme Court of the United States (6)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (5)
- Criminal Law (5)
-
- Fourteenth Amendment (5)
- Criminal Procedure (4)
- Jurisprudence (4)
- Administrative Law (3)
- Family Law (3)
- Law and Gender (3)
- State and Local Government Law (3)
- Conflict of Laws (2)
- Education Law (2)
- Health Law and Policy (2)
- Law and Politics (2)
- Medical Jurisprudence (2)
- Sexuality and the Law (2)
- Civil Law (1)
- Civil Procedure (1)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (1)
- Contracts (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Human Rights Law (1)
- International Law (1)
- Juvenile Law (1)
- Labor and Employment Law (1)
- Law and Race (1)
- Law and Society (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 55
Full-Text Articles in Law
Rights Of State Prisoners - Federal Court Intervention In State Prison Administration; Jones V. Wittenberg, Ronald L. Collins
Rights Of State Prisoners - Federal Court Intervention In State Prison Administration; Jones V. Wittenberg, Ronald L. Collins
Akron Law Review
The path to federal court intervention into state prison administration has been a tortuous and rocky one.... Jones v. Wittenberg carries federal court intervention into state prison administration to new lengths. Until more basic and lasting changes are made on the part of society and the states, such intervention seems to be the best chance for ameliorating conditions in our state penal systems.
Constitutional Law - Flag Desecration Statutes - Freedom Of Expression; Parker V. Morgan, Bruce C. Heslop
Constitutional Law - Flag Desecration Statutes - Freedom Of Expression; Parker V. Morgan, Bruce C. Heslop
Akron Law Review
Viewed in its broad perspective, Parker v. Morgan has further clarified and circumscribed the constitutional limits of the state's power to protect the American flag from public acts of desecration. In this respect it may be considered to provide further insight into the constitutional questions involved in this relatively untouched area of the law. However, until authoritative consideration has been given to the nature and source of those protective powers which are reserved to a state, Parker v. Morgan cannot be regarded to have drawn the ultimate lines of demarcation for the constitutional validity of flag desecration statutes. A meaningful …
Constitutional Law And Secured Transactions: State Action V. Private Action - Uniform Commercial Code Self-Help; Repossession Provisions - Do Not Violate Due Process Requirements; Adams V. Southern California First National Bank, David M. Hunter
Akron Law Review
Several years ago, the United States Supreme Court, in Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp.,' signaled what has been eventually interpreted in subsequent decisions as the strict measurement of creditors' rights against the requirements of due process set forth in the fourteenth amendment. What has since transpired has been an onslaught of litigation in this area of such magnitude that the due process requirements of prior notice and hearing found in Sniadach have been extended to virtually all forms of prejudgment remedies available to the aggrieved creditor. Despite all of this, the rationale of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth …
Obscenity - New First Amendment Standards; Miller V. California, Stacy E. Wolfe
Obscenity - New First Amendment Standards; Miller V. California, Stacy E. Wolfe
Akron Law Review
It has been over fifteen years since the Supreme Court embarked on its precarious course of determining the Constitutional boundaries for control of obscenity by the state and federal governments. The Court's first attempt to define the meaning of obscenity and ultimately determine the Constitutional protection afforded this expression was in Roth v. United States. What has followed can only be characterized as a series of irreconcilable conflicts and discrepancies that have left the law in this area in total confusion. Recently, the Court in Miller v. California has again attempted to provide "concrete guidelines to isolate 'hard core' pornography …
Fifth Amendment - Due Process Clause- Sex Discrimination - Sex: A Suspect Classification; Frontiero V. Richardson, John J. Cook
Fifth Amendment - Due Process Clause- Sex Discrimination - Sex: A Suspect Classification; Frontiero V. Richardson, John J. Cook
Akron Law Review
Sharon A. Frontiero, a lieutenant in the United States Air Force, sought increased benefits for her husband as a "dependent" under 37 U.S.C. Sections 401, 4031 and 10 U.S.C. Sections 1072, 10762 Those statutes provide that spouses of male members of the uniformed services are always dependents for purposes of obtaining increased quarters allowances and medical and dental benefits, but that spouses of female members are not dependents unless they are, in fact, dependent for over one-half of their support.3
Equal Protection - Property Taxes As A Method Of Funding Public Education; San Antonio Independent School District V. Rodriguez, Mark K. Croft
Equal Protection - Property Taxes As A Method Of Funding Public Education; San Antonio Independent School District V. Rodriguez, Mark K. Croft
Akron Law Review
Suit was brought in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas challenging the constitutionality of the Texas school financing system on the theory that it discriminated on a basis of wealth, permitting provision of a higher quality of education to be offered the children in property-rich school districts while residents pay a lower tax rate, thus denying equal protection of the law.' The District Court found the laws forming this system unconstitutional on this basis. Appeal brought the case to the Supreme Court in October of 1972, where it was reversed.
Obscenity - Liquor Regulations; California V. Larue, Richard Bernstein
Obscenity - Liquor Regulations; California V. Larue, Richard Bernstein
Akron Law Review
The state has the power to regulate the distribution of liquor and enforce health and safety regulations, but the state may not broadly stifle First Amendment freedoms when doing so. "The breath of legislative abridgement must be viewed in the light of less drastic means for achieving the same basic purpose." s The Court has consistently held that only a compelling state interest in the regulation of a subject within the state's constitutional power to regulate can justify limiting First Amendment freedoms.
Search And Seizure - Warrantless Search- Allowable Extent Incident To Arrest; United States V. Robinson, John Nelson Childs
Search And Seizure - Warrantless Search- Allowable Extent Incident To Arrest; United States V. Robinson, John Nelson Childs
Akron Law Review
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Metropolitan Policeman Richard Jencks, on April 19, 1968, halted Willie Robinson for a "routine spot check."' While examining Robinson's driver's license, motor vehicle registration, and selective service card, Officer Jencks noticed an 11-year discrepancy between the two birthdates listed on his driver's license and his draft card. Upon a later check of police traffic records, Officer Jencks discovered that an operator's permit issued to "Willie Robinson, Jr.," born in 1927, had been revoked and that a temporary license had been issued to a "Willie Robinson," born in 1938. Four days later, the same officer observed Robinson operating …
Student Rights Under The Due Process Clause . . . Suspensions From Public Schools; Goss V. Lopez, Glenn W. Soden
Student Rights Under The Due Process Clause . . . Suspensions From Public Schools; Goss V. Lopez, Glenn W. Soden
Akron Law Review
IN ADDRESSING ITSELF to the constitutionality of Section 3316.66 of the Ohio Revised Code,' the United States Supreme Court in Goss v. Lopez has ruled for the first time upon the extent to which the rights of students are to be protected under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment in conjunction with any disciplinary removal from a public school. By its action the Court has tacitly undertaken to lift the cloud on student rights which has existed under the common law doctrine of in loco parentis, and interpose procedural safeguards upon any decision of school officials to deprive …
Marriage Rights; Homosexuals And Transsexuals; B. V. B.,, William D. Lentz
Marriage Rights; Homosexuals And Transsexuals; B. V. B.,, William D. Lentz
Akron Law Review
WHAT IS A MARRIAGE? Although there are several definitions, they all contain one common element: the union of one man and one woman. However, if a particular state had no statute which specifically required that marriage be between a man and a woman would the courts uphold a marriage between members of the same sex? The New York Supreme Court, in B. v. B., answered that question in the negative. In that case the wife brought an action for annulment on the ground that her husband was a female, and the husband attempted to amend his answer and counterclaim for …
Courts, Creditors' Rights; Debtors' Protection; Sequestration; Mitchell V. W.T. Grant Co., Sandra J. Pickut
Courts, Creditors' Rights; Debtors' Protection; Sequestration; Mitchell V. W.T. Grant Co., Sandra J. Pickut
Akron Law Review
SINCE 1969, AND TE DECISION in Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp.,' the confrontation between the creditor and the constitution has continued apace. Sniadach began an expansion of the measure of due process applicable to creditors' prejudgment remedies, and heralded a new era of protection for the property interests of vendee-debtors under the cloak of the fourteenth amendment. However, the most recent decision of the Supreme Court on summary prejudgment remedies, Mitchell v. W. T. Grant Co., appears to have abruptly halted that expansion and has returned judicial thinking to a concept of due process prevalent in the pre-Sniadach era. Accordingly, …
Section 1983 - Eleventh Amendment - Executive Immunity; Scheuer V. Rhodes
Section 1983 - Eleventh Amendment - Executive Immunity; Scheuer V. Rhodes
Akron Law Review
0N APRIL 29, 1970, the Governor of Ohio called out elements of the Ohio National Guard in response to alleged civil disorders in the city of Kent, Ohio, and on the campus of Kent State University. In the course of the resulting confrontation between students and members of the Guard, four students were shot and killed. The personal representatives of the estates of three of the deceased students brought actions for damages under the Civil Rights Act of 18711 naming the Governor, the Adjutant General of the Ohio National Guard, various officers and members of the Guard, and the president …
Searches And Seizures - Banks And Banking - Witnesses - Right To Privacy; California Bankers Association V. Schultz, David F. Dybvig
Searches And Seizures - Banks And Banking - Witnesses - Right To Privacy; California Bankers Association V. Schultz, David F. Dybvig
Akron Law Review
FOLLOWING EXTENSIVE HEARINGS, Congress enacted what has become known as the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970. In California Bankers Association v. Schultz, certain parts of the Act were subjected to constitutional attack by various plaintiffs, including individual bank customers, a national bank, a bankers association, and the American Civil Liberties Union, representing itself and its bank customer members. The plaintiffs' challenges rested on the first, fourth, fifth, ninth, tenth, and fourteenth amendments.
Divorce - Pendente Lite Awards - Counsel Fees - Costs - Alimony - Effect Of Equal Rights Amendment; Wiegand V. Wiegand, Joseph M. Donley
Divorce - Pendente Lite Awards - Counsel Fees - Costs - Alimony - Effect Of Equal Rights Amendment; Wiegand V. Wiegand, Joseph M. Donley
Akron Law Review
THE PENNSYLVANIA SUPERIOR COURT, in Wiegand v. Wiegand,struck out at one of the true bastions of sex discrimination incorporated into the Anglo-American legal system. The legislated discrimination of the Pennsylvania Divorce Law was the object of the court's scrutiny. Appellee Sara Wiegand had filed a complaint in divorce a mensa et thora, a petition for alimony, and an initial petition for alimony pendente lite, counsel fees, and expenses. On August 14, 1967, the Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County, ordered appellant Myron Wiegand to pay $875 per month alimony pendente lite and $250 preliminary counsel fees. Subsequently, appellee filed additional …
Standing; Assertion Of Jus Tertii; Sex Discrimination; Equal Protection; Twenty-First Amendment; Craig V. Boren, Anthony Sadowski
Standing; Assertion Of Jus Tertii; Sex Discrimination; Equal Protection; Twenty-First Amendment; Craig V. Boren, Anthony Sadowski
Akron Law Review
"A PPELLANTS brought an action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. The complaint charged that the operation of two Oklahoma statutes, which prohibited the sale of 3.2% beer to males under the age of 21 while allowing females over the age of 18 to purchase the commodity, violated the fourteenth amendment to the Federal Constitution. The three-judge court held that the gender-based classification did not violate the equal protection clause. In Craig v. Boren, on direct appeal, the United States Supreme Court reversed, finding that the gender-based classification could …
Standing; Assertion Of Jus Tertii; Sex Discrimination; Equal Protection; Twenty-First Amendment; Craig V. Boren, Anthony Sadowski
Standing; Assertion Of Jus Tertii; Sex Discrimination; Equal Protection; Twenty-First Amendment; Craig V. Boren, Anthony Sadowski
Akron Law Review
APPELLANTS brought an action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.' The complaint charged that the operation of two Oklahoma statutes,' which prohibited the sale of 3.2% beer to males under the age of 21 while allowing females over the age of 18 to purchase the commodity, violated the fourteenth amendment to the Federal Constitution. The three-judge court held that the gender-based classification did not violate the equal protection clause.' In Craig v. Boren,' on direct appeal, the United States Supreme Court reversed, finding that the gender-based classification could not …
Municipal Zoning; Mandatory Referendum For Zoning Amendments; Lawful Delegation Of Legislative Power; Due Process; City Of Eastlake V. Forest City Enterprises, Inc., Elizabeth Reilly
Akron Law Review
No abstract provided.
Civil Rights Act; Section 1981; Title Vii; Reverse Discrimination; Equal Protection; Mcdonald V. Santa Fe Trail Transp. Co., Caroline Williams
Civil Rights Act; Section 1981; Title Vii; Reverse Discrimination; Equal Protection; Mcdonald V. Santa Fe Trail Transp. Co., Caroline Williams
Akron Law Review
No abstract provided.
Civil Rights Act; Section 1981; Title Vii; Reverse Discrimination; Equal Protection; Mcdonald V. Santa Fe Trail Transp. Co., Caroline Williams
Civil Rights Act; Section 1981; Title Vii; Reverse Discrimination; Equal Protection; Mcdonald V. Santa Fe Trail Transp. Co., Caroline Williams
Akron Law Review
THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT in McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Co.' held that Title VIP prohibits racial discrimination by both employers and unions against white persons upon the same standards as it prohibits racial discrimination against nonwhites. The Court further held that Section 19811 is applicable to racial discrimination in private employment against white persons as well as nonwhites.
Municipal Zoning; Mandatory Referendum For Zoning Amendments; Lawful Delegation Of Legislative Power; Due Process; City Of Eastlake V. Forest City Enterprises, Inc., Elizabeth Reilly
Akron Law Review
IN City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises, Inc.," the United States Supreme Court held that a mandatory referendum on all zoning changes did not violate the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. The Court decided that such referenda are not delegations of legislative power, but exercises of the people's reserved power. Therefore, they need not be accompanied by discernible standards as with delegations of power to administrative agencies.
Abortion, Parental And Spousal Consent, Requirements; Right To Privacy; Planned Parenthood Of Central Missouri V. Danforth, Sharon L. Long, Patricia Ravenscraft
Abortion, Parental And Spousal Consent, Requirements; Right To Privacy; Planned Parenthood Of Central Missouri V. Danforth, Sharon L. Long, Patricia Ravenscraft
Akron Law Review
TWO MISSOURI-LICENSED physicians and Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri, a nonprofit corporation, originally brought this suit in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri to challenge the constitutionality of the Missouri abortion statute' (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Striking as "overbroad" only that portion of the Act which would have required physicians to attempt to save an aborted fetus' life at any stage of pregnancy, the district court upheld the sections of the statute which required that during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, a married woman seeking an abortion must have the consent of her spouse,' …
Abortion, Parental And Spousal Consent, Requirements; Right To Privacy; Planned Parenthood Of Central Missouri V. Danforth, Sharon L. Long, Patricia Ravenscraft
Abortion, Parental And Spousal Consent, Requirements; Right To Privacy; Planned Parenthood Of Central Missouri V. Danforth, Sharon L. Long, Patricia Ravenscraft
Akron Law Review
TWO MISSOURI-LICENSED physicians and Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri, a nonprofit corporation, originally brought this suit in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri to challenge the constitutionality of the Missouri abortion statute' (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Striking as "overbroad" only that portion of the Act which would have required physicians to attempt to save an aborted fetus' life at any stage of pregnancy,2 the district court upheld the sections of the statute which required that during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, a married woman seeking an abortion must have the consent of her spouse,' …
Double Jeopardy; Juvenile Courts; Transfer To Criminal Court; Adjudicatory Proceedings; Breed V. Jones, Barry S. Mittenthal
Double Jeopardy; Juvenile Courts; Transfer To Criminal Court; Adjudicatory Proceedings; Breed V. Jones, Barry S. Mittenthal
Akron Law Review
THE FIFTH AMENDMENT prohibition against double jeopardy is designed to protect both federal and state' defendants from the embarrassment, expense and ordeal of successive criminal trials, which not only create anxiety and uncertainty in an accused, but also increase the danger that an innocent person may be convicted.' However, as a result of the "juvenile court's assumed ability to function in a unique manner"' a juvenile is not extended the protection of the panoply of constitutional rights afforded an adult in a criminal proceeding. Accordingly, the Supreme Court, in Breed v. Jones, was called upon to determine the applicability and …
Civil Commitment Of Mentally Ill; Right To Treatment; Parens Patriae Power; Right To Liberty; Donaldson V. O'Connor, Gary G. Cooper
Civil Commitment Of Mentally Ill; Right To Treatment; Parens Patriae Power; Right To Liberty; Donaldson V. O'Connor, Gary G. Cooper
Akron Law Review
THE RESPONDENT, Kenneth Donaldson, was involuntarily civilly committed! as a mental patient' in the Florida State Hospital at Chattahoochee. He remained confined for almost 15 years.' During that time he received little or no psychiatric care or treatment. His confinement was a "simple regime of enforced custodial care, not a program designed to alleviate or cure his supposed illness."' Donaldson, who was not aggressive or belligerent, repeatedly attempted to secure his release, claiming that the defendants unjustifiably continued to confine him despite attempts by responsible parties to have him released to their custody. In February, 1971, Donaldson filed suit under …
Administrative Agencies; Subpoena Power; Relevancy; Right Of Privacy; Atchison, Topeka & Sante Fe Ry. Co. V. Lopez, David L. Hostetler
Administrative Agencies; Subpoena Power; Relevancy; Right Of Privacy; Atchison, Topeka & Sante Fe Ry. Co. V. Lopez, David L. Hostetler
Akron Law Review
The Kansas Supreme Court in Sante Fe has joined the majority of states in declaring that administrative "fishing expeditions" via the use of subpoena powers are now permissible. No probable cause need be shown and confidential information may be subject to subpoena if there is even a mere possibility of relevance to a matter within the scope of the agency's authority. The state's interest in preventing discrimination in employment practices has been declared a "compelling state interest" such as to override any claims to rights of privacy. Although primarily discussing only arrest and conviction records, the court in actuality upheld …
Economic Discrimination; Denial Of Social Security Benefits Premised On Gender-Based Classification Is Unconstitutional; Violates Equal Protection; Weinberger V. Wiesenfeld, Janice M. Ahern
Akron Law Review
After his wife's death, Wiesenfeld applied for social security survivor benefits for himself and his infant son. While he was able to obtain benefits for his son under 42 U.S.C. Section 402(d), he was denied benefits under Section 402(g) because those benefits were available only to widows and surviving divorced mothers. When his application was denied, Wiesenfeld brought suit in federal district court to obtain declaratory and injunctive relief,' contending that the gender-based classification of 42 U.S.C. Section 402(g) violated equal protection as found within the due process clause of the fifth amendment.' A three-judge district court panel granted relief …
Abortion; Parental Consent; Minors' Rights To Due Process, Equal Protection And Privacy; State V. Koome, Barbara Child
Abortion; Parental Consent; Minors' Rights To Due Process, Equal Protection And Privacy; State V. Koome, Barbara Child
Akron Law Review
The Washington court had before it a physician appealing his conviction for performing an abortion on an unmarried 16-year-old woman, a ward of the King County Juvenile Court, which had given its consent to the abortion. However, the young woman's parents and the Catholic Children's Services, her temporary guardian, both opposed the abortion and were granted a stay of the abortion order pending review by the state supreme court. During the stay, Dr. Koome performed the abortion. The supreme court held that the Washington consent statute "too broadly encumbers the right of unmarried minor women to choose to terminate pregnancy, …
The Hohfeldian Approach To Constitutional Cases, H. Newcomb Morse
The Hohfeldian Approach To Constitutional Cases, H. Newcomb Morse
Akron Law Review
INFERRED, OR AT THE MOST rebuttably presumed, is a slight acquaintanceship on the part of the reader with the work on jural opposites and jural correlatives by Professor W. Newcomb Hohfeld. The Founding Fathers, as though anticipating the coming of the Messianic logician, used all of the four Hohfeldian gravamen terms-rights, privileges, powers and immunities-in the Constitution of the United States,' and for this reason the author perceives a nexus between Hohfeldian logic and constitutional construction. The appropriate initial touchstone for contemporary use of this theory could appear to be the 1968 case of Flast v. Cohen, considering Mr. Justice …
Separation Of Powers; Bill Of Attainder; Presidential Papers; Chief Executive's Right To Privacy; Nixon V. Administrator Of General Services, Patricia L. Spencer
Separation Of Powers; Bill Of Attainder; Presidential Papers; Chief Executive's Right To Privacy; Nixon V. Administrator Of General Services, Patricia L. Spencer
Akron Law Review
In addressing itself to the constitutionality of the "Presidential Recording and Materials Preservation Act," the United States Supreme Court in Nixon v. Administrator of General Services (Nixon II) ruled for the first time on the permissible extent of congressional authority to regulate the disposition of official records and papers of a former chief executive. By its action, the Court undertook to reverse two hundred years of practice by past presidents.
Corporal Punishment In Schools; Due Process; Cruel And Unusual Punishment; Ingraham V. Wright, Mary W. Altier
Corporal Punishment In Schools; Due Process; Cruel And Unusual Punishment; Ingraham V. Wright, Mary W. Altier
Akron Law Review
Corporal punishment as a means of disciplining school children has been used in this country since colonial days. There have been various constitutional attacks on the practice of inflicting corporal punishment, with varying results, and the issue was finally brought before the Supreme Court in Ingraham v. Wright. The Court decided on April 19, 1977 that the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause of the eighth amendment does not apply to disciplinary corporal punishment in public schools and that the Due Process Clause of the fourteenth amendment does not require notice and hearing prior to imposition of corporal punishment, as …