Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 13 of 13

Full-Text Articles in Law

Decisionmaking In Patent Cases At The Federal Circuit, Jason Reinecke Jan 2024

Decisionmaking In Patent Cases At The Federal Circuit, Jason Reinecke

Washington and Lee Law Review

This Article provides the results of an empirical study assessing the impact of panel composition in patent cases at the Federal Circuit. The dataset includes 2675 three-judge panel-level final written decisions and Rule 36 summary affirmances issued by the Federal Circuit between January 1, 2014 and May 31, 2021. The study informs the longstanding debate concerning whether the Federal Circuit is succeeding as a court with nationwide jurisdiction in patent cases and provides insight into judicial decisionmaking more broadly. And several results show that many of the worst fears that commentators have about the Federal Circuit appear overstated or untrue. …


To Preserve, Release, And Litigate: Dimensions Of Executive Branch Transparency, Tracey E. George Feb 2023

To Preserve, Release, And Litigate: Dimensions Of Executive Branch Transparency, Tracey E. George

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The Trump campaign and presidency were marked by multiple controversies centered on transparencyor the lack thereof. Prior to his election, then‐candidate Donald Trump broke with presidentialcampaign norms by refusing to release his tax returns. Attempts by Democratic‐controlled Housecommittees and Democratic New York state officials to access President Trump's tax records werecontested by Trump at every stage. The resulting court battles lasted throughout his presidency andeventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court.The Trump White House also broke with the Obamaadministration's practice of releasing White House visitor logs, removing from public view the record ofwho visited the White House and when (Kennedy,2017). At …


Feminist Judging Matters: How Feminist Theory And Methods Affect The Process Of Judgment, Linda L. Berger, Bridget J. Crawford, Kathryn M. Stanchi Jan 2018

Feminist Judging Matters: How Feminist Theory And Methods Affect The Process Of Judgment, Linda L. Berger, Bridget J. Crawford, Kathryn M. Stanchi

Scholarly Works

Professor Linda Berger rejoins her Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Opinions of the United States Supreme Court coauthors in this essay presenting feminism as the foundation for a developing form of rich, complex, and practical legal scholarship-the lens and the means through which we may approach and resolve many legal problems. First, this essay explores the intellectual foundations of feminist legal theory and situates the United States and international feminist judgments projects within that scholarly tradition. It next considers how the feminist judgments projects move beyond traditional academic scholarship to bridge the gap between the real-world practice of law and feminist theory. …


Doctrinal Reasoning As A Disruptive Practice, Jessie Allen Jan 2018

Doctrinal Reasoning As A Disruptive Practice, Jessie Allen

Articles

Legal doctrine is generally thought to contribute to legal decision making only to the extent it determines substantive results. Yet in many cases, the available authorities are indeterminate. I propose a different model for how doctrinal reasoning might contribute to judicial decisions. Drawing on performance theory and psychological studies of readers, I argue that judges’ engagement with formal legal doctrine might have self-disrupting effects like those performers experience when they adopt uncharacteristic behaviors. Such disruptive effects would not explain how judges ultimately select, or should select, legal results. But they might help legal decision makers to set aside subjective biases.


Impartiality In Judicial Ethics: A Jurisprudential Analysis, W. Bradley Wendel Feb 2015

Impartiality In Judicial Ethics: A Jurisprudential Analysis, W. Bradley Wendel

W. Bradley Wendel

No abstract provided.


Empirical Doctrine, Jessie Allen Jan 2015

Empirical Doctrine, Jessie Allen

Articles

We can observe and measure how legal decision makers use formal legal authorities, but there is no way to empirically test the determinative capacity of legal doctrine itself. Yet, discussions of empirical studies of judicial behavior sometimes conflate judges’ attention to legal rules with legal rules determining outcomes. Doctrinal determinacy is not the same thing as legal predictability. The extent to which legal outcomes are predictable in given contexts is surely testable empirically. But the idea that doctrine’s capacity to produce or limit those outcomes can be measured empirically is fundamentally misguided. The problem is that to measure doctrinal determinacy, …


Impartiality In Judicial Ethics: A Jurisprudential Analysis, W. Bradley Wendel Jan 2008

Impartiality In Judicial Ethics: A Jurisprudential Analysis, W. Bradley Wendel

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


Further Thoughts, Erwin Chemerinsky Jan 2001

Further Thoughts, Erwin Chemerinsky

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.


Getting Beyond Formalism In Constitutional Law: Constitutional Theory Matters, Erwin Chemerinsky Jan 2001

Getting Beyond Formalism In Constitutional Law: Constitutional Theory Matters, Erwin Chemerinsky

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.


Replies To Professor Chemerinsky, David W. Levy, Harry F. Tepker Jr., Arthur G. Lefrancois, Kevin W. Saunders, Michael A. Scaperlanda, Katheleen R. Guzman, Lindsay G. Robertson Jan 2001

Replies To Professor Chemerinsky, David W. Levy, Harry F. Tepker Jr., Arthur G. Lefrancois, Kevin W. Saunders, Michael A. Scaperlanda, Katheleen R. Guzman, Lindsay G. Robertson

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.


"I Vote This Way Because I'M Wrong": The Supreme Court Justice As Epimenides, John M. Rogers Jan 1991

"I Vote This Way Because I'M Wrong": The Supreme Court Justice As Epimenides, John M. Rogers

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Possibly the most unsettling phenomenon in the Supreme Court's 1988 term was Justice White's decision to vote contrary to his own exhaustively stated reasoning in Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co. His unexplained decision to vote against the result of his own analysis lends support to those who argue that law, or at least constitutional law, is fundamentally indeterminate. Proponents of the indeterminacy argument sometimes base their position on the allegedly inescapable inconsistency of decisions made by a multi-member court. There is an answer to the inconsistency argument, but it founders if justices sometimes vote, without explanation, on the basis of …


Rethinking The Judicial Reception Of Legislative Facts, Ann Woolhandler Jan 1988

Rethinking The Judicial Reception Of Legislative Facts, Ann Woolhandler

Vanderbilt Law Review

In a recent article, Professor Peggy Davis called for reforms in judicial reception of legislative facts. Her suggestions, which follow an empirical analysis of the use of psychological parent theories in child custody disputes, echo similar proposals by Professor Kenneth Karst in 1960s and by Professors Arthur Miller and Jerome Barron in 1975 for judicial reception of legislative facts in constitutional cases.As originally defined by Kenneth Culp Davis, legislative facts are facts that "inform[] a court's legislative judgment on questions of law and policy." They contrast with adjudicative facts, which are facts about "what the parties did, what the circumstances …


The Theory Of Judicial Reasoning--Toward A Reconstruction, Peter W. Gross Jan 1978

The Theory Of Judicial Reasoning--Toward A Reconstruction, Peter W. Gross

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.