Law Commons^™

Criminal Discovery And The Costs Of Reproduction: A Burden Taxpayers Should Not Have To Bear, Gary C. Pinter

Northern Illinois University Law Review

This comment asserts that a prosecutor's office may charge privately-retained defense counsel for the costs the prosecutor's office may incur as a result of reproducing material that may be requested via discovery. Although the evolution of discovery has resulted in rules or statutes that differ with respect to a particular jurisdiction's scope of discovery or its adopted approach, the overwhelming majority of discovery provisions regarding the prosecutor's duty of disclosure are very similar. The duty essentially requires that the prosecutor make the particular material available and permit its inspection and reproduction. Consequently, to forbid a prosecutor from seeking reimbursement for …

Presidential Signing Statements: Hearing Before The S. Comm. On The Judiciary, 109th Cong., June 27, 2006 (Statement Of Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Flying Without A Statutory Basis: Why Mcdonnell Douglas Is Not Justified By Any Statutory Construction Methodology, Sandra F. Sperino

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

The McDonnell-Douglas three-part burden-shifting framework has come under increasing attack in recent years. While policy arguments in favor of eliminating the standard are important, one of the strongest arguments in favor if its demise, is that the standard was adopted without proper regard to the operative text, the legislative history, and the broad policies of Title VII. This Article examines the McDonnell-Douglas framework through four leading models of statutory construction and concludes that a satisfactory statutory justification for the test is lacking. While it arguably may have been appropriate to justify this lapse in the past by claiming that the …

Presidential Signing Statements: How To Find Them, How To Use Them, And What They Might, Steve Sheppard

Steve Sheppard

Lawyers should be cautious when seeking guidance in statutory interpretation from presidential signing statements. Reliance on signing statements as a source of statutory interpretation is controversial, as deference to the president’s interpretation, rather than interpretations of the legislature or judiciary, can lead to unlimited executive power. Signing statements can be retrieved from government resources or private vendors, and they are useful for advising clients how to interact with government agencies. In effect, signing statements act as orders from the president, which agencies under the executive chain of command follow.

Signing statements are also useful as sources of statutory interpretation when …

Under Construction: Questioning Whether Statutory Construction Principles Justify Individual Liability Under The Family And Medical Leave Act, Sandra F. Sperino

Missouri Law Review

The question of whether individuals can be personally liable under the Family and Medical Leave Act ("FMLA") has been percolating in the federal courts for more than a decade. Over this period, district courts throughout the country have consistently held that individuals working for private employers can be held liable for FMLA violations. Given the length of time over which the courts have been considering this issue, it would seem safe to assume that the courts have fully examined the factors that might lead to individual liability, such as the FMLA's statutory language, other courts' interpretations of similar language, the …

Is The Report Of Lazarus's Death Premature? A Reply To Cameron And Postlewaite, Douglas A. Kahn

Articles

Over a year ago, Ms. Faith Cuenin and I wrote an article in this Review (which I hereafter refer to as the "2004 Article") about the tax treatment of guaranteed payments under section 707(c) that are made in kind.' We concluded that a partnership does not recognize gain or loss on the making of a guaranteed payment with appreciated or depreciated property. We also concluded that the partner's basis in the property received will equal its fair market value at the time of payment, and that the payment does not affect the partner's outside basis in his partnership interest except …