Law Commons^™

Vicarious Liability In Sexual Misconduct Cases In Minnesota, Mike Steenson

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

Employers are vicariously liable for torts committed by their employees acting within the course and scope of their employment. The predominant test turns on whether the employee acted, at least in part, out of a desire to serve the employer’s interests. That test is problematic in cases involving intentional torts committed by an employee, particularly in sexual assault cases. Existing vicarious liability rules have been heavily criticized for the motive rule’s limiting effect, even where the nature of the employment may facilitate the tort. A minority of jurisdictions impose vicarious liability in cases where the tort is a characteristic risk …

Justice For The Accomplice: Minnesota's 2023 Accomplice Liability Amendment And Its Shortcomings, John M. Thompson

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Developer Perspectives On Licensing And Copyright Issues Arising From Generative Ai For Software Development, Trevor Stalnaker, Nathan Wintersgill, Oscar Chaparro, Laura A. Heymann, Massimiliano Di Penta, Daniel M. German, Denys Poshyvanyk

Faculty Publications

Despite the utility that Generative AI (GenAI) tools provide for tasks such as writing code, the use of these tools raises important legal questions and potential risks, particularly those associated with copyright law. As lawmakers and regulators respond to these questions, the views of users can offer relevant perspectives. In this article, we provide: (1) a survey of 574 developers on the licensing and copyright aspects of GenAI for coding, as well as follow-up interviews; (2) a snapshot of developers’ views at a time when GenAI and perceptions of it were rapidly evolving; and (3) an analysis of developers’ perspectives, …

To The Hague And Beyond: The Shifting Terrain Of International Criminal Justice, Leila Nadya Sadat, Valerie Oosterveld, Sharon Weil, Nancy Combs, David Crane

Faculty Publications

Panel of international criminal law experts speak about the areas in which they work.

(Reverse) Piercing The Trust Veil, Eric Kades

Faculty Publications

Emergent doctrine deems trusts legal entities distinct from their trustees and beneficiaries. Venerable doctrine empowers creditors to "pierce the veil" separating entities' and their owners' property to avoid inequitable treatment. This article weaves together the new and old to craft a legal roadmap for reversing the ongoing race to the bottom among the states authorizing indefensible self-settled asset protection trusts (SSAPTs) designed solely for the purpose of swindling creditors. As a matter of both policy and doctrine, piercing (more precisely, reverse piercing) an entity's veil is ideally suited to empower the creditor of a SSAPT beneficiary to get paid from …

The Specter Of Jury Nullification, Anna Offit

Faculty Publications

Attention to the trial of Luigi Mangione has renewed debate about nullification—the jury’s inviolate power to acquit a defendant contrary to the evidence presented. Jury nullification proponents hold that it is a mechanism of last resort for refusing to apply laws that conflict with the public conscience. Opponents, by contrast, argue that nullification undermines the law by diminishing its legitimacy. To prosecutors and defense attorneys, however, these arguments are immaterial: Jury nullification is part of the institutional landscape of the contemporary jury trial and thus must be treated as a potentiality—a feature of the agnostic, strategic, and ethical terrain of …

Campbell At 30: A Retrospective Appreciation, Michael W. Carroll, Peter Jaszi

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

This Article traces the intellectual history of copyright law’s fair use doctrine at the Supreme Court from its first encounter with fair use to its landmark decision slightly more than three decades ago in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. Campbell provided courts with a coherent, user-centered theory for applying the four statutory fair use factors provided under 17 U.S.C. § 107, a standard the Court recently ratified in Google LLC v. Oracle Am., Inc. and Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts v. Goldsmith. As one of three related articles, this Article advances two principal claims to contribute to …

Lunch Shaming And The Right To Privacy, Ira P. Robbins

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Lunch shaming is the practice of penalizing students who cannot afford to pay for their meals, resulting in them being denied food, served alternative meals, or publicly identified. The origins of lunch shaming can be traced to the financial pressures faced by school districts that struggle to balance tight budgets with the mandate to provide free or reduced-price meals to eligible students. Despite legislative efforts and advocacy campaigns aimed at mitigating the problems associated with lunch shaming, the practice persists, exacerbated by rising food costs and the expiration of pandemic-era food programs.

Many law journal and other articles have correctly …

Originalism As Disruption, Susan D. Carle

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

This Article challenges the conventional understanding of originalism as a method that promotes unchanging constitutional meanings. Drawing on four and a half decades of experience since Attorney General Edwin Meese first championed originalism as a conservative project, this Article demonstrates that originalism has generally proven destabilizing rather than stabilizing to constitutional law. Landmark cases such as New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College, and Shelby County v. Holder show that the Supreme Court frequently deploys originalism when it seeks to upend settled constitutional doctrine, contradicting claims …

Law’S Limits: Abortion And The Social Determinants Of Health, Maya Manian

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

After Dobbs: How the Supreme Court Ended Roe but Not Abortion (“After Dobbs”) is a prescient and timely response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade and upended nearly five decades of constitutional protection for abortion. In this meticulously structured oral history, law professor David S. Cohen and sociologist Carole Joffe center the voices of abortion providers, clinic administrators, funders, and advocates from across the country. After Dobbs, not only documents the extraordinary persistence of abortion supporters in the face of legal devastation but also bears witness to …

Examining Reproductive Equity In The Post-Roe United States, Yali Pang, Anna Grace Causey, Nakeina E. Douglas-Glenn, Research Institute For Social Equity Rise

Research Institute for Social Equity

Four years after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, state-level variation in reproductive rights policy is associated with substantial geographic inequities in access to abortion and reproductive health care across the United States. The adoption of restrictive or protective reproductive rights policies is closely tied to legislative control, underscoring the political drivers of reproductive inequity. The evidence suggests that advancing reproductive equity will require coordinated national, state, and local response to strengthen healthcare infrastructure, reduce economic barriers, and establish durable legislative protections for reproductive rights.

The Judicial Voice On The Courts Of Appeals, Allison Orr Larsen, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

The judicial voice on an appellate court typically speaks in the collective, so when a judge chooses to go solo—either in a dissent or a concurrence—that act deserves a close look. Separate opinions on the U.S. Supreme Court are common because the Justices have strong incentives to articulate a distinctive personal jurisprudence. But lower court judges have always been more reluctant to write separately, and for good reason. The institutional design and longstanding practices of the U.S. courts of appeals are very different from the Supreme Court: Lower appellate court judges are bound by precedent in a different way, rarely …

2025-2026 Annual Report, Heyman Center On Corporate Governance

Heyman Center Annual Reports

The 2025–2026 Annual Report of the Samuel & Ronnie Heyman Center on Corporate Governance at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law highlights the Center's academic programs, events, and initiatives throughout the academic year. The report documents discussions and programming addressing antitrust enforcement, corporate governance, bankruptcy and restructuring, cryptocurrency regulation, and emerging legal issues. It also provides an overview of the Heyman Business Law Colloquium, business law curriculum, clinical programs, and experiential learning opportunities. Additionally, the report highlights the Heyman Scholars Program, which welcomed 55 participating students, and profiles the Center's leadership and affiliated faculty.