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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

Split-Recovery: A Constitutional Answer To The Punitive Damage Dilemma, Clay R. Stevens Nov 2012

Split-Recovery: A Constitutional Answer To The Punitive Damage Dilemma, Clay R. Stevens

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Inalienable Right Of Publicity, Jennifer E. Rothman Nov 2012

The Inalienable Right Of Publicity, Jennifer E. Rothman

All Faculty Scholarship

This article challenges the conventional wisdom that the right of publicity is universally and uncontroversially alienable. Courts and scholars have routinely described the right as a freely transferable property right, akin to patents or copyrights. Despite such broad claims of unfettered alienability, courts have limited the transferability of publicity rights in a variety of instances. No one has developed a robust account of why such limits should exist or what their contours should be. This article remedies this omission and concludes that the right of publicity must have significantly limited alienability to protect the rights of individuals to control the …


The Constitutional Bounding Of Adjudication: A Fuller(Ian) Explanation For The Supreme Court's Mass Tort Jurisprudence, Donald G. Gifford Apr 2012

The Constitutional Bounding Of Adjudication: A Fuller(Ian) Explanation For The Supreme Court's Mass Tort Jurisprudence, Donald G. Gifford

Donald G Gifford

In this Article, I argue that the Supreme Court is implicitly piecing together a constitutionally mandated model of bounded adjudication governing mass torts, using decisions that facially rest on disparate constitutional provisions. This model constitutionally restricts common law courts from adjudicating the rights, liabilities, and interests of persons who are neither present before the court nor capable of being defined with a reasonable degree of specificity. I find evidence for this model in the Court’s separate decisions rejecting tort-based climate change claims, global settlements of massive asbestos litigation, and punitive damages awards justified as extra-compensatory damages. These new forms of …


Congress's Power To Preempt The States, Stephen Gardbaum Mar 2012

Congress's Power To Preempt The States, Stephen Gardbaum

Pepperdine Law Review

In this Article, part of a symposium on federal preemption of state tort law, I build upon my earlier work on the nature of preemption to try and deepen the conceptual and constitutional foundations of the subject. I argue that this neglected dimension must be moved to center stage if preemption doctrine is to have a coherent and principled framework. In particular, the key issues are the nature, source, and limits of Congress's power to preempt the states. The result is that preemption should be understood as a discretionary power of Congress the source of which lies in the Necessary …


University Of Baltimore Symposium Report: Debut Of “The Matthew Fogg Symposia On The Vitality Of Stare Decisis In America”, Zena D. Crenshaw-Logal Jan 2012

University Of Baltimore Symposium Report: Debut Of “The Matthew Fogg Symposia On The Vitality Of Stare Decisis In America”, Zena D. Crenshaw-Logal

Zena Denise Crenshaw-Logal

On the first of each two day symposium of the Fogg symposia, lawyers representing NGOs in the civil rights, judicial reform, and whistleblower advocacy fields are to share relevant work of featured legal scholars in lay terms; relate the underlying principles to real life cases; and propose appropriate reform efforts. Four (4) of the scholars spend the next day relating their featured articles to views on the vitality of stare decisis. Specifically, the combined panels of public interest attorneys and law professors consider whether compliance with the doctrine is reasonably assured in America given the: 1. considerable discretion vested in …


The Constitutional Bounding Of Adjudication: A Fuller(Ian) Explanation For The Supreme Court's Mass Tort Jurisprudence, Donald G. Gifford Jan 2012

The Constitutional Bounding Of Adjudication: A Fuller(Ian) Explanation For The Supreme Court's Mass Tort Jurisprudence, Donald G. Gifford

Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, I argue that the Supreme Court is implicitly piecing together a constitutionally mandated model of bounded adjudication governing mass torts, using decisions that facially rest on disparate constitutional provisions. This model constitutionally restricts common law courts from adjudicating the rights, liabilities, and interests of persons who are neither present before the court nor capable of being defined with a reasonable degree of specificity. I find evidence for this model in the Court’s separate decisions rejecting tort-based climate change claims, global settlements of massive asbestos litigation, and punitive damages awards justified as extra-compensatory damages. These new forms of …


A Tale Of Two Ironies: In Defense Of Tort, David Partlett, William Gill Dec 2011

A Tale Of Two Ironies: In Defense Of Tort, David Partlett, William Gill

William Gill

Charles Dickens likely never imagined that he would be quoted so often in legal discourse.' Yet it is not surprising that he resonates in the world of legal theory, rich as his work is with ironies that operate on personal as well as political levels. Take, for example, A TALE OF TWO CITIES, in which a revolution fought in the name of liberty turns to tyranny, and stable, tradition-bound Burkean ideals provide the means to freedom for those terrorized in the name of liberty.2 The seeds of such ironies have also taken root in the law of our two "cities," …