Law Commons^™

When Deciding Whether To Transfer Venue, Bankruptcy Courts Will Consider Their Discretion To Retain A Case, As Well As The Interests Of Justice And Convenience Of The Parties, Cole Eiber

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

When a debtor decides to file a petition for bankruptcy, one decision to make is in what court, or what jurisdiction to file. However, the debtor’s choice of where to file is not always indisputable. Once a case is filed in a particular court, any “party in interest” may bring a motion seeking to change the venue of the case to an alternate court. Additionally, a court, on its own motion, may transfer a case to an alternate venue. The three statutory provisions that govern transfers of venue are Bankruptcy Rule 1014 (“Rule 1014”), 28 U.S.C. § 1408 (“Section …

Catch And Release Jurisdiction, Adam B. Sopko

Michigan Law Review Online

In Catch and Kill Jurisdiction, Professor Zachary Clopton sheds light on an increasingly common phenomenon in which federal courts are expanding the power of the federal judiciary in a way that frustrates the enforcement of substantive rights. Federal courts expansively interpret their jurisdiction to reach cases that arguably belong in state court, then apply federal procedural doctrines to dismiss the cases on non-merits grounds. First catch, then kill. Clopton argues we find catch and kills when the federal court system is not overly burdened and in areas where federal judges are “hostile” to a class of claims or litigants. Catch …

Maintaining Due Process By Extending Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. To Federal Class Actions, Felicia D. Sych

American University Law Review

In 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its seminal decision in Bristol Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, subsequently altering the scope of personal jurisdiction and further narrowing its interpretation of specific jurisdiction. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. held that a state court can only assert specific personal jurisdiction over a defendant when there is a meaningful nexus between the forum state and the claims at issue. The Court purposefully refrained from deciding whether its holding applies to federal courts adjudicating federal class actions. After denying a petition for writ of certiorari to resolve the issue in 2021, the question …

The Mystery Of The Leavenworth Oaths, M H. Hoeflich, Stephen M. Sheppard

Faculty Articles

Lawyers have sworn an oath to be admitted to the Bar since the beginnings of the Anglo-American legal profession. The oath serves several extremely important purposes. First, it is the formal act that admits an individual into the Bar and confers upon the oath taker the right to perform the duties of an attorney in the jurisdiction in which the oath is given. Second, the oath admits the new attorney to the broader world of the legal profession and signifies that the new attorney has been judged by the oath giver as worthy of the right to practice law. Third, …

Changemakers: Master Of Studies In Law: "Exactly What I Needed...": John Marion, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Jurisdiction And The Moral Impact Theory Of Law, Michael S. Green

Faculty Publications

Positivists and interpretivists (Dworkinians) might accept that conceptual facts about the law—facts about the content of the concept of law—can obtain in the absence of communities with law practices. But they would deny that legal facts can obtain in such communities’ absence. Under the moral impact theory, by contrast, legal facts can precede all communities with law practices. I identify a set of legal facts in private international law—the law of jurisdiction—that concerns when a community’s law practices can, and cannot, have the legal effects that the practices claim to have. This law is noncommunitarian, in the sense …

Treaty Interpretation At The Human Rights Committee: Reconciling International Law And Normativity, David H. Moore

Faculty Scholarship

The Human Rights Committee, the expert body overseeing states’ compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”), is a key institution in the international human rights architecture. The Committee’s work requires constant interpretation of the ICCPR’s human rights guarantees. While international law dictates how to interpret treaty provisions, including those of the ICCPR, the Committee does not consistently follow the international law of treaty interpretation. Rather, normativity plays an influential role in the Committee’s interpretations. This approach is not uniformly negative; it has both costs and benefits. To minimize the costs, however, this Article identifies a path …

American University Law Review Keynote Address, Erwin Chemerinsky

American University Law Review

My talk this morning focuses on the agenda of the current Roberts Court. I think that every Supreme Court can be said to have an agenda. Sometimes it seems conscious and deliberate, apparent from the outset. Sometimes it seems to evolve and only becomes obvious later.

Intra-Eu Investment Disputes And The Monopoly Over The Interpretation Of Eu Law, Petros C. Mavroidis, Frederico Ortino

Faculty Scholarship

Following a recent European Charter Treaty (“ECT”) decision, it appears that the fate of intra-EU investment disputes, when adjudicated in fora other than the Luxembourg courts, is finally all but sealed. In Green Power, an arbitration tribunal confirmed prior decisions taken in different jurisdictions that there is no room for adjudicating intra-EU investment disputes away from Luxembourg. This decision sided with the approach already developed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) in three decisions, namely, Achmea, Komstroy, and PL Holdings, which in turn led to legislative action by the Energy Charter Treaty aiming to put an …

‘I Will Control Your Mind’: The International Regulation Of Brain-Hacking, Thibault Moulin

San Diego International Law Journal

In the near future, the use of neurotechnologies—like brain-computer interfaces and brain stimulation—could become widespread. It will not only be used to help persons with disabilities or illness, but also by members of the armed forces and in everyday life (e.g., for entertainment and gaming). However, recent studies suggested that it is possible to hack into neural devices to obtain information, inflict pain, induce mood change, or influence movements. This Article anticipates three scenarios which may be challenging in the future—i.e., brain hacking for the purpose of reading thoughts, remotely controlling someone, and inflicting pain or death—and assesses their compliance …

A Jurisprudential Quilt Of Tribal Civil Jurisdiction: An Analysis Of Tribal Court Approaches To Determining Civil Adjudicatory Jurisdiction, Jacob Maiman-Stadtmauer

American Indian Law Journal

There are hundreds of Native American Tribes with their own judicial systems and courts. Under the test first established in Montana v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States has provided a single, nebulous standard for determining the limits of tribal courts’ jurisdiction over non-Indians. Scholars and federal jurists have long assumed that the Supreme Court's framework limiting tribal civil jurisdiction is essential to how tribal courts determine jurisdiction. This paper challenges that assumption. Through a first of its kind survey of tribal court decisions on civil jurisdiction, spanning 26 tribes and covering 71 decisions, this paper …

Running On Empty: Ford V. Montana And The Folly Of Minimum Contacts, James P. George

Faculty Scholarship

Jurisdictional contests are in disarray. Criticisms date back to the issuance of International Shoe Co. v. Washington but the breakdown may be best illustrated in two recent Supreme Court opinions, the first rejecting California’s “sliding scale” that mixes general and specific contacts, the second using the discredited sliding scale to hold Ford amenable in states where accidents occurred.

California’s sliding scale is one variety of the contacts-relatedness tests, used in lower courts to have general contacts bolster weaker specific contacts. Some states—Montana and Minnesota for example—use the opposite extreme requiring a causal connection in defendant’s forum contacts, often using foreseeability …

Solving The Procedural Puzzles Of The Texas Heartbeat Act And Its Imitators: New York Times V. Sullivan As Historical Analogue, Charles W. "Rocky" Rhodes, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

The Texas Heartbeat Act (S.B. 8) prohibits abortions following detection of a fetal heartbeat while delegating exclusive enforcement through private civil actions brought by “any person,” regardless of injury, for statutory damages of a minimum of $10,000 per prohibited abortion. Texas sought to impose costly litigation and potentially crippling liability on reproductive health providers and rights advocates, with the hope of stopping abortion in the state. Prior to Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overruling Roe v. Wade and eliminating constitutional protection for abortion, the law represented a unique threat to reproductive freedom. But states are spreading S.B. 8’s exclusive …

Ford V. Where Are We?: The Revival Of The Sliding Scale To Govern The Supreme Court's New "Relating To" Personal Jurisdiction, Zois Manaris

William & Mary Law Review

This Note proposes a test to govern “relating to” specific jurisdiction, a variation on a theme to those familiar with the doctrine: a “sliding scale” approach to contacts and relatedness, accompanied by a separate assessment of reasonableness factors the Supreme Court has outlined in previous cases to serve as a check on the sliding scale. Part I of this Note explains the “sliding scale” approach, its unpleasant first interaction with the Court, and its revival by the Ford majority. Part II defines this Note’s proposed test and demonstrates its consistency with Supreme Court precedent. Finally, Part III applies this Note’s …

Jurisdictional Issues In Cyberspace, Justice S. Muralidhar

Indian Journal of Law and Technology

With the advent of the internet and the transmission of information and transacting of business across borders, a host of issues have cropped up on the legal front. This article proposes to deal with only one such major issue – that of jurisdiction of the courts to deal with intellectual property rights (IPR) disputes arising out of commercial transactions on the internet. Within the fairly broad field of IPR, the focus will be on trademark disputes, as that is one area where the major developments have taken place.

Oklahoma V. Castro-Huerta, United States Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh

US Government Documents Related to Indigenous Nations

This United States (US) Supreme Court decision, argued April 27, 2022 and decided June 29, 2022 expanded the reach of state jurisdiction to allow for prosecution of crimes that occur on Indigenous land, regardless of whether or not a state is named as having such jurisdiction under US Public Law 280. In 2020, the US Supreme Court's decision on McGirt v. Oklahoma established that much of the eastern part of the state of Oklahoma is Indigenous land and therefore falls under either tribal jurisdiction or Federal jurisdiction. In 2015 Victor Manuel Castro-Huerta was charged and convicted of child neglect by …

The 24th Annual Open Government Summit: Your Guide To The Access To Public Records Act & Open Meetings Act, Peter F. Neronha, Roger Williams University School Of Law

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

What It Takes: A Statistical Analysis Of Arkansas Supreme Court’S Petition For Review Process, Justice Rhonda Wood, Jessica Finan Patterson, Brian W. Johnson

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Jurisdiction At Work: Specific Personal Jurisdiction In Flsa Collective Actions After Bristol-Myers Squibb, Anaid Reyes Kipp

Georgia State University Law Review

In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court (BMS), eighty-six California residents and five hundred ninety-two nonresidents from thirty-three different states, who had originally filed eight separate complaints, used ordinary party joinder rules to file a mass tort action in California state court, alleging that Bristol-Myers Squibb’s blood-thinning drug made them sick. The Supreme Court held in 2017 that the California state court did not have specific personal jurisdiction over the national pharmaceutical company because its contacts with California were insufficient in relation to the claims by nonresident plaintiffs. Although BMS was a mass action filed in state court, its …

Still On Patrol: An Argument For Greater Protections For Sunken American State Vessels In International And Foreign Coastal Waters, Sarah Elizabeth Catterson

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Quint, the surly captain from Steven Spielberg’s Jaws, is perhaps most famous for his soliloquy recounting the Indianapolis tragedy. The Indy, as she was called, sunk just under fifteen minutes after being hit by Japanese torpedoes in 1945 following her delivery of the components for the Hiroshima atomic bomb to the Pacific island of Tinian. It took the Navy five days to realize she was missing, by which point 600 of the 800 survivors had died from exposure or shark attacks. The Indy remained missing until she was found seventy-two years later by the Petrel, a …

Recent Developments, Silas Heffley

Arkansas Law Review

In a case involving a Missouri televangelist, a purported COVID-19 cure, and state officials from Arkansas and California, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Interrogating The Nonincorporation Of The Grand Jury Clause, Roger A. Fairfax Jr.

Cardozo Law Review

With the Supreme Court’s recent incorporation—in Ramos v. Louisiana—of the Sixth Amendment’s jury unanimity requirement to apply to the states, the project of “total incorporation” is all but complete in the criminal procedure context. Virtually every core criminal procedural protection in the Bill of Rights has been incorporated through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to constrain not only the federal government, but also the states—with one exception. The Fifth Amendment’s grand jury right now stands alone as the only federal criminal procedural right the Supreme Court has permitted states to ignore. In one of the earliest incorporation …

Disinformation On Trial: Fighting Foreign Disinformation By Empowering The Victims, Ari B. Rubin

Cardozo Law Review

Foreign disinformation catapulted into the national spotlight with the 2016 presidential election, but its impact is not confined to the electoral map or season. This Article addresses the threat of foreign disinformation by proposing a new statute: a private right of action, enabling harmed persons to directly sue state or private actors, foreign or domestic, who knowingly or recklessly spread disinformation from abroad. Scholars and policymakers have proposed other, far-flung solutions ranging from greater online security to outright censorship. Each of those ideas stumbles on common challenges and lacks a valuable ingredient: an interested party, directly harmed by the foreign …

Omar Effendi Vs. Union Fenosa: Corruption As A Transnational Public Policy Consideration, Ahmed Badr Eldin

Theses and Dissertations

At the beginning of 2011, Egypt witnessed radical political developments that led to the emergence of a pressing tendency to adjudicate the collapsed regime’s policies and practices. Shortly thereafter, the Egyptian State Council issued a number of judicial decisions that confirmed that the sale of the privatized governmental enterprises had been tainted by corruption. Crucially, the Court maintained that flagrant breach of law, regulations, and administrative orders that encompassed these transactions created serious suspicions about corruption committed by public officials and investors. It concluded that the existence of corruption, as a transnational public policy consideration, had deprived foreign investors of …

Solving The Procedural Puzzles Of The Texas Heartbeat Act And Its Imitators: The Limits And Opportunities For Offensive Litigation, Charles W. "Rocky" Rhodes, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

Texas' Fetal Heartbeat Act, enacted in 2021 as Senate Bill 8, prohibits abortions following detection of a fetal heartbeat, a constitutionally invalid ban under current Supreme Court precedent. But the method of enforcement in the Texas law is unique—it prohibits enforcement by government officials in favor of private civil actions brought by “any person,” regardless of injury. Texas sought to burden reproductive-health providers and rights advocates with costly litigation and potentially crippling liability.

In a series of articles, we explore how SB8's exclusive reliance on private enforcement creates procedural and jurisdictional hurdles to challenging the law's constitutional validity and obtaining …

Solving The Procedural Puzzles Of Texas’ Fetal-Heartbeat Law And Its Imitators: The Potential For Defensive Litigation, Charles W. "Rocky" Rhodes, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

Texas' Fetal Heartbeat Act, enacted in 2021 as Senate Bill 8, prohibits abortions following detection of a fetal heartbeat, a constitutionally invalid ban under current Supreme Court precedent. But the method of enforcement in the Texas law is unique—it prohibits enforcement by government officials in favor of private civil actions brought by “any person,” regardless of injury. Texas sought to burden reproductive-health providers and rights advocates with costly litigation and potentially crippling liability.

In a series of articles, we explore how SB8's exclusive reliance on private enforcement creates procedural and jurisdictional hurdles to challenging the law's constitutional validity and obtaining …

"Only To Have A Say In The Way He Dies:" Bodily Autonomy And Methods Of Execution, Alexandra L. Klein

Faculty Articles

Capital punishment is one of the most significant intrusions into a person's bodily autonomy; the state takes a person's life. Even though the state has stripped a person on death row of much of their autonomy and intends to kill them, removing all autonomy, a person sentenced to death may, in some circumstances, choose how they will die. While most states rely on a single method of execution, some states permit a condemned person to choose among two or more methods of execution. Constitutional challenges to methods of execution requires the challenger to demonstrate a substantial risk of severe pain …

When Police Volunteer To Kill, Alexandra L. Klein

Faculty Articles

The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of lethal injection, yet states continue to struggle with drug shortages and botched executions. Some states have authorized alternative methods of execution, including the firing squad. Utah, which has consistently carried out firing squad executions throughout its history, relies on police officers from the jurisdiction where the crime took place to volunteer to carry out these executions. This represents a plausible-and probable method for other states in conducting firing squad executions.

Public and academic discussion of the firing squad has centered on questions of pain and suffering. It has not engaged with the …

Legislative Push Towards Supersession In Missouri: Why The State Attorney General Should Not Be Statutorily Granted Concurrent Jurisdiction With Locally Elected Prosecutors, Josef Nilhas

Saint Louis University Law Journal

There is a current trend of electing progressive or “reform-minded” prosecutors over “tough-on-crime” prosecutors in local elections across the country. Traditionally, prosecutors have possessed wide discretion over which cases to prosecute or not, and the law presumes that “prosecutors make discretionary decisions disinterestedly, unaffected by their own self-interest or the interest of others.” However, recently in Missouri, state officials have pushed for providing the state attorney general with concurrent jurisdiction over certain cases. In particular, the Missouri Senate passed a provision through an amendment to House Bill 2 (“HB2”) that would allow the State Attorney General to take over homicide …

The Heat Is On: Will Climate Change Suits Pressure The Supreme Court To Evolve Its Federal Question Jurisdiction?, Katie Hoffecker

Saint Louis University Law Journal

No abstract provided.