Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (168)
- Jurisdiction (135)
- Civil Procedure (117)
- State and Local Government Law (102)
- Supreme Court of the United States (93)
-
- Criminal Procedure (86)
- Legislation (85)
- Evidence (66)
- Criminal Law (58)
- Judges (56)
- Litigation (52)
- Legal History (51)
- Administrative Law (47)
- Jurisprudence (41)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (40)
- Labor and Employment Law (36)
- Torts (36)
- Common Law (33)
- Contracts (32)
- Estates and Trusts (32)
- Law and Society (26)
- Property Law and Real Estate (26)
- Bankruptcy Law (23)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (23)
- Legal Remedies (23)
- Legal Writing and Research (23)
- Insurance Law (22)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (20)
- Keyword
-
- State courts (113)
- Federal courts (92)
- United States Supreme Court (64)
- Judicial review (60)
- Juries (32)
-
- Trials (28)
- England (27)
- Statutory interpretation (23)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (22)
- Michigan (22)
- History (21)
- Book reviews (19)
- Due process (19)
- Habeas corpus (19)
- Constitution (18)
- Law reform (18)
- Witnesses (16)
- Congress (15)
- Sixth Amendment (15)
- Authority (14)
- New York (14)
- Federalism (13)
- Liability (13)
- Caseloads (11)
- Causes of action (11)
- Empirical studies (11)
- Federal agencies (11)
- Lawyers (11)
- Circuit splits (10)
- Crimes (10)
- Publication Year
Articles 121 - 150 of 879
Full-Text Articles in Courts
Trolling For Trolls: The Pitfalls Of The Emerging Market Competition Requirement For Permanent Injunctions In Patent Cases Post-Ebay, Benjamin H. Diessel
Trolling For Trolls: The Pitfalls Of The Emerging Market Competition Requirement For Permanent Injunctions In Patent Cases Post-Ebay, Benjamin H. Diessel
Michigan Law Review
In eBay v. MercExchange, a unanimous Supreme Court announced that a new four-factor test should be employed by district courts in determining whether to award an injunction or damages to an aggrieved party whose intellectual property has been infringed. In the context of permanent injunctions in patent cases, district courts have distorted the four-factor test resulting in a "market competition requirement." Under the new market competition requirement, success at obtaining an injunction is contingent upon a party demonstrating that it is a market competitor After consistent application in the first twenty-five district court cases post-eBay, the market competition requirement …
Reading Too Much Into Reeder-Simco?, Jeremy M. Suhr
Reading Too Much Into Reeder-Simco?, Jeremy M. Suhr
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that a careful analysis of the Supreme Court's opinion in Volvo Trucks North America, Inc. v. Reeder-Simco GMC, Inc. demonstrates that, despite the expansive dicta appearing in part IV of that opinion, the Court did not intend to reshape the course of its Robinson-Patman Act jurisprudence in any significant way. The Court's opinion operated well within the confines of established Robinson-Patman Act doctrine, even if its searching review of the evidence presented at trial represented a rare foray into the arena of factual error correction. After Reeder-Simco, however, many commentators emphasized the dicta in part IV …
Proximate Cause In Constitutional Torts: Holding Interrogators Liable For Fifth Amendment Violations At Trial, Joel Flaxman
Proximate Cause In Constitutional Torts: Holding Interrogators Liable For Fifth Amendment Violations At Trial, Joel Flaxman
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues for the approach taken by the Sixth Circuit in McKinley: a proper understanding of the Fifth Amendment requires holding that an officer who coerces a confession that is used at trial to convict a defendant in violation of the right against self-incrimination should face liability for the harm of conviction and imprisonment. Part I examines how the Supreme Court and the circuits have applied the concept of common law proximate causation to constitutional torts and argues that lower courts are wrong to blindly adopt common law rules without reference to the constitutional rights at stake. It …
Twins Or Triplets?: Protecting The Eleventh Amendment Through A Three-Prong Arm-Of-The-State Test, Héctor G. Bladuell
Twins Or Triplets?: Protecting The Eleventh Amendment Through A Three-Prong Arm-Of-The-State Test, Héctor G. Bladuell
Michigan Law Review
In 1999, the Supreme Court held that the common law principle that the sovereign cannot be sued in its own courts without its consent was embedded in the Constitution's structure when it was ratified. The Court, however, has not always adhered to this view. In 1793, when a citizen of South Carolina sued the State of Georgia to enforce a debt arising from the sale of Revolutionary War supplies, the Court ordered the State to fulfill its obligation even though the State had not consented to the suit. Alarmed by the sudden opening of their treasuries to federal courts over …
Scrutinizing The Second Amendment, Adam Winkler
Scrutinizing The Second Amendment, Adam Winkler
Michigan Law Review
One overlooked issue in the voluminous literature on the Second Amendment is what standard of review should apply to gun control if the Amendment is read to protect an individual right to bear arms. This lack of attention may be due to the assumption that strict scrutiny would necessarily apply because the right would be "fundamental" or because the right is located in the Bill of Rights. In this Article, Professor Winkler challenges that assumption and considers the arguments for a contrary conclusion: that the Second Amendment's individual right to bear arms is appropriately governed by a deferential, reasonableness review …
Keeping The Door Ajar For Foreign Plaintiffs In Global Cartel Cases After Empagran, Jeremy M. Suhr
Keeping The Door Ajar For Foreign Plaintiffs In Global Cartel Cases After Empagran, Jeremy M. Suhr
Michigan Law Review
In many ways, the Supreme Court's opinion of F. Hoffmann-LaRoche Ltd. V. Empagran S.A. raised more questions than it answered. Growing out of the massive international vitamins cartel uncovered in the 1990s, Empagran presented a scenario in which all parties were foreign and all conduct occurred abroad. Although it is "well established by now that the Sherman Act applies to foreign conduct that was meant to produce and did in fact produce some substantial effect in the United States," Empagran presented the Court with the first truly foreign antitrust case. It involved not only foreign conduct, but also foreign plaintiffs …
Mostly Harmless: An Analysis Of Post-Aedpa Federal Habeas Corpus Review Of State Harmless Error Determinations, Jeffrey S. Jacobi
Mostly Harmless: An Analysis Of Post-Aedpa Federal Habeas Corpus Review Of State Harmless Error Determinations, Jeffrey S. Jacobi
Michigan Law Review
Sixty years ago, in Kotteakos v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that a small class of so-called harmless errors committed by courts did not require correction. The Court acknowledged that some judicial errors, though recognizable as errors, did not threaten the validity of criminal convictions and therefore did not quite require reversal. Specifically, the Court held that errors that violated federal statutes should be deemed harmless unless they had a "substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict." While Kotteakos represented the Supreme Court's first treatment of the concept of harmlessness, other courts had a …
Secondhand Smoke Signals From Prison, Scott C. Wilcox
Secondhand Smoke Signals From Prison, Scott C. Wilcox
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that courts should acknowledge current societal and medical perspectives on second hand smoke (SHS) and afford real protection to prisoners against SHS through injunctive relief. Part I examines evidence that conclusively demonstrates the serious risk of harm posed by SHS to the health of inmates. It reports that inmates' long-term exposure to SHS increases their risk of contracting lung cancer, heart disease, and other potentially life threatening conditions. Part II argues that, as required by the Helling standard, contemporary society does not tolerate involuntary, long-term exposure to SHS and that prison officials exhibit deliberate indifference by allowing …
The Glucksberg Renaissance: Substantive Due Process Since Lawrence V. Texas, Brian Hawkins
The Glucksberg Renaissance: Substantive Due Process Since Lawrence V. Texas, Brian Hawkins
Michigan Law Review
On their faces, Washington v. Glucksberg and Lawrence v. Texas seem to have little in common. In Glucksberg, the Supreme Court upheld a law prohibiting assisted suicide and rejected a claim that the Constitution protects a "right to die"; in Lawrence, the Court struck down a law prohibiting homosexual sodomy and embraced a claim that the Constitution protects homosexual persons' choices to engage in intimate relationships. Thus, in both subject matter and result, Lawrence and Glucksberg appear far apart. The Lawrence Court, however, faced a peculiar challenge in reaching its decision, and its response to that challenge brings …
There's No "I" In "League": Professional Sports Leagues And The Single Entity Defense, Nathaniel Grow
There's No "I" In "League": Professional Sports Leagues And The Single Entity Defense, Nathaniel Grow
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that outside of labor disputes, sports leagues should be presumed to be single entities. Part I argues that professional sports leagues are single entities in disputes regarding league-wide, non-labor policy. In particular, the focus of the Supreme Court's jurisprudence on economic reality rather than organizational form necessitates a finding that professional sports leagues are single entities in non-labor disputes. Part II argues that professional sports leagues are not single entities for purposes of labor disputes; sports leagues, on the whole, do not involve a unity of interest for labor matters. More importantly, existing precedent outside of the …
Concurring In Part & Concurring In The Confusion, Sonja R. West
Concurring In Part & Concurring In The Confusion, Sonja R. West
Michigan Law Review
When a federal appellate court decided last year that two reporters must either reveal their confidential sources to a grand jury or face jail time, the court did not hesitate in relying on the majority opinion in the Supreme Court's sole comment on the reporter's privilege-Branzburg v. Hayes. "The Highest Court has spoken and never revisited the question. Without doubt, that is the end of the matter," Judge Sentelle wrote for the three-judge panel of the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. By this declaration, the court dismissed with a wave of its judicial hand the arguments …
Pathological Patenting: The Pto As Cause Or Cure, Rochelle Dreyfuss
Pathological Patenting: The Pto As Cause Or Cure, Rochelle Dreyfuss
Michigan Law Review
The Patent Act was last revised in 1952. The hydrogen bomb was exploded that year, vividly demonstrating the power of the nucleus; in the ensuing postwar period, the Next Big Thing was clearly the molecule. Novel compounds were synthesized in the hopes of finding new medicines; solid-state devices exploited the special characteristics of germanium and other semiconductors; as investments in polymer chemistry soared, advice to the college graduate soon boiled down to "one word ... just one word[:] ... Plastics." Over the next half-century, things changed dramatically. "Better living through chemistry" has begun to sound dated (if not sinister). Genomics …
Contra Proferentem: The Allure Of Ambiguous Boilerplate, Michelle E. Boardman
Contra Proferentem: The Allure Of Ambiguous Boilerplate, Michelle E. Boardman
Michigan Law Review
Bad boilerplate can shake one' s faith in evolution; not only does it not die away, it multiplies. The puzzle is why. Much of boilerplate is ambiguous or incomprehensible. This alienates consumers and is i ncreasingly punished by courts construing the language against the drafter. There must, therefore, be some hidden allure to ambiguous boilerplate. The popular theory is trickery: drafters lure consumers in with promising language that comes to nothing in court. But this trick would require consumers to do three things they do not do-read the language, understand it, and take comfort in it. There is a hidden …
Tribute To John Pickering, William J. Perlstein
Tribute To John Pickering, William J. Perlstein
Michigan Law Review
One of my colleagues asked me soon after John died, "How could someone live to be eighty-nine years old and yet there is no one who had a bad word to say about him?" This is an intriguing question. It is not because John Pickering did not have strongly held views about things. Anyone who ever tangled with John in crafting a brief knew how tenacious he was. John was direct and candid and you knew where he stood on any matter. It is not because John was easygoing. When he saw something that he wanted changed, he did not …
A Prudential Exercise: Abstention And The Probate Exception To Federal Diversity Jurisdiction, Christian J. Grostic
A Prudential Exercise: Abstention And The Probate Exception To Federal Diversity Jurisdiction, Christian J. Grostic
Michigan Law Review
Ann-Marie Brege's parents established an irrevocable trust in 1985, with Ann-Marie as sole beneficiary. When Merrill Lynch Trust Co. took over as trustee years later, however, the trust's principal dropped sharply, losing over half its value in just a few years. Ann-Marie sued in Michigan probate court, alleging that Merrill Lynch had violated its legal duties in administering the trust. Since Ann-Marie was from New York and Merrill Lynch had its headquarters in New Jersey, Merrill Lynch had an apparently easy argument for diversity jurisdiction. In an unremarkable turn of events, Merrill Lynch filed a notice of removal to federal …
Word Games: Raising And Resolving The Shortcomings In Accident-Insurance Doctrine That Autoerotic-Asphyxiation Cases Reveal, Sam Erman
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that autoerotic asphyxiation deaths are accidents and not the results of intentionally self-inflicted injuries. Part I formally analyzes accident-insurance case law to show that current, viable approaches to accident insurance indicate that autoerotic asphyxiation deaths are accidental. Part II claims autoerotic asphyxiation deaths should not trigger intentionally self-inflicted injury exclusion clauses because the practice does not intentionally injure. This Note concludes beneficiaries should recover when accident-insurance policyholders die during autoerotic asphyxiation.
Subdivisions, Standing And The Supremacy Clause: Can A Political Subdivision Sue Its Parent State Under Federal Law, Brian P. Keenan
Subdivisions, Standing And The Supremacy Clause: Can A Political Subdivision Sue Its Parent State Under Federal Law, Brian P. Keenan
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that political subdivisions should be able to seek protection from their parent states under the Supremacy Clause when alleging a conflict between state law and any federal law, be it the Constitution, treaty, or a federal statute. Part I argues that the precedential cases like Hunter and Trenton were limited to the constitutional provisions in question and therefore did not bar all suits under the Supremacy Clause. Part II shows that the issue is one of constitutional protection of political subdivisions, rather than Article III standing, which had a completely different meaning when Hunter and Trenton were …
Theory Wars In The Conflict Of Laws, Louise Weinberg
Theory Wars In The Conflict Of Laws, Louise Weinberg
Michigan Law Review
Fifty years ago, at the height of modernism in all things, there was a great revolution in American choice-of-law theory. You cannot understand what is going on in the field of conflict of laws today without coming to grips with this central fact. With this revolution, the old formalistic way of choosing law was dethroned, and has occupied a humble position on the sidelines ever since. Yet there has been no lasting peace. The American conflicts revolution is still happening, and poor results are still frustrating good intentions. Now comes Dean Symeon Symeonides, the author of the choice of- law …
Pluralizing International Criminal Justice, Mark A. Drumbl
Pluralizing International Criminal Justice, Mark A. Drumbl
Michigan Law Review
From Nuremberg to The Hague scours the institutions of international criminal justice in order to examine their legitimacy and effectiveness. This collection of essays is edited by Philippe Sands, an eminent authority on public international law and professor at University College London. The five essays derive from an equal number of public lectures held in London between April and June 2002. The essays - concise and in places informal - carefully avoid legalese and arcania. Taken together, they cover an impressive spectrum of issues. Read individually, however, each essay is ordered around one or two well-tailored themes, thereby ensuring analytic …
There Is Always A Need: The "Necessity Doctrine" And Class Certification Against Government Agencies, Daniel Tenny
There Is Always A Need: The "Necessity Doctrine" And Class Certification Against Government Agencies, Daniel Tenny
Michigan Law Review
On its face, Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure seems tailor-made for lawsuits against government. Rule 23(b)(2) allows a class action when "the party opposing the class has acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the class, thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief with respect to the class as a whole." This situation arises frequently in people's dealings with government agencies: recipients of public benefits and consumers using public utilities, for example, constitute large groups of people all subject to identical government policies who might seek injunctive relief. Litigants attempting …
Does History Defeat Standing Doctrine?, Ann Woolhandler, Caleb Nelson
Does History Defeat Standing Doctrine?, Ann Woolhandler, Caleb Nelson
Michigan Law Review
According to the Supreme Court, the Federal Constitution limits not only the types of matters that federal courts can adjudicate, but also the parties who can bring those matters before them. In particular, the Court has held that private citizens who have suffered no concrete private injury lack standing to ask federal courts to redress diffuse harms to the public at large. When such harms are justiciable at all, the proper party plaintiff is the public itself, represented by an authorized officer of the government. Although the Court claims historical support for these ideas, academic critics insist that the law …
The Irrepressible Myth Of Marbury, Michael Stokes Paulsen
The Irrepressible Myth Of Marbury, Michael Stokes Paulsen
Michigan Law Review
Nearly all of American constitutional law today rests on a myth. The myth, presented as standard history both in junior high civics texts and in advanced law school courses on constitutional law, runs something like this: A long, long time ago - 1803, if the storyteller is trying to be precise - in the famous case of Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court of the United States created the doctrine of "judicial review." Judicial review is the power of the Supreme Court to decide the meaning of the Constitution and to strike down laws that the Court finds unconstitutional. As …
Judging The Next Emergency: Judicial Review And Individual Rights In Times Of Crisis, David Cole
Judging The Next Emergency: Judicial Review And Individual Rights In Times Of Crisis, David Cole
Michigan Law Review
As virtually every law student who studies Marbury v. Madison learns, Chief Justice John Marshall's tactical genius was to establish judicial review in a case where the result could not be challenged. As a technical matter, Marbury lost, and the executive branch won. As furious as President Jefferson reportedly was with the decision, there was nothing he could do about it, for there was no mandate to defy. The Court's decision offered no remedy for Marbury himself, whose rights were directly at issue, and whose rights the Court found had indeed been violated. But over time, it became clear that …
Legislating Chevron, Elizabeth Garrett
Legislating Chevron, Elizabeth Garrett
Michigan Law Review
One of the most significant administrative law cases, Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, lnc., is routinely referred to as the "counter-Marbury." The reference suggests that Chevron's command to courts to defer to certain reasonable agency interpretations of statutes is superficially an uneasy fit with the declaration in Marbury v. Madison that "[i]t is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is." According to the consensus view, Chevron deference is consistent with Marbury, as long as Congress has delegated to agencies the power to make policy by interpreting ambiguous statutory language or filling …
Alternative Forms Of Judicial Review, Mark Tushnet
Alternative Forms Of Judicial Review, Mark Tushnet
Michigan Law Review
The invention in the late twentieth century of what I call weak-form systems of judicial review provides us with the chance to see in a new light some traditional debates within U.S. constitutional law and theory, which are predicated on the fact that the United States has strong-form judicial review. Strong- and weak-form systems operate on the level of constitutional design, in the sense that their characteristics are specified in constitutional documents or in deep-rooted constitutional traditions. After sketching the differences between strong- and weak-form systems, I turn to design features that operate at the next lower level. Here legislatures …
Comparative Constitutionalism In A New Key, Paul W. Kahn
Comparative Constitutionalism In A New Key, Paul W. Kahn
Michigan Law Review
Law is a symbolic system that structures the political imagination. The "rule of law" is a shorthand expression for a cultural practice that constructs a particular understanding of time and space, of subjects and groups, as well as of authority and legitimacy. It is a way of projecting, maintaining, and discovering meaning in the world of historical events and political possibilities. The rule of law - as opposed to the techniques of lawyering - is not the possession of lawyers. It is a characterization of the polity, which operates both descriptively and normatively in public perception. Ours, we believe, is …
Reinforcing Representation: Congressional Power To Enforce The Fourteenth And Fifteenth Amendments In The Rehnquist And Waite Courts, Ellen D. Katz
Reinforcing Representation: Congressional Power To Enforce The Fourteenth And Fifteenth Amendments In The Rehnquist And Waite Courts, Ellen D. Katz
Michigan Law Review
A large body of academic scholarship accuses the Rehnquist Court of "undoing the Second Reconstruction," just as the Waite Court has long been blamed for facilitating the end of the First. This critique captures much of what is meant by those generally charging the Rehnquist Court with "conservative judicial activism." It posits that the present Court wants to dismantle decades' worth of federal antidiscrimination measures that are aimed at the "reconstruction" of public and private relationships at the local level. It sees the Waite Court as having similarly nullified the civil-rights initiatives enacted by Congress following the Civil War to …
Government Responsibility For The Acts Of Jailhouse Informants Under The Sixth Amendment, Maia Goodell
Government Responsibility For The Acts Of Jailhouse Informants Under The Sixth Amendment, Maia Goodell
Michigan Law Review
Once a criminal investigation has identified a suspect, and adversarial proceedings have begun, the Sixth Amendment confers a right to be represented by counsel at the "critical stages" of the process. The Supreme Court has made clear that the government cannot circumvent this requirement merely by designating a civilian informant to engage in questioning on its behalf. Less clear is when the government is responsible for the actions of an informant; particularly in the case of jailhouse informants, incarcerated individuals who question fellow inmates, government responsibility is a difficult issue for which no clear legal standard has emerged. An examination …
First Amendment Equal Protection: On Discretion, Inequality, And Participation, Daniel P. Tokaji
First Amendment Equal Protection: On Discretion, Inequality, And Participation, Daniel P. Tokaji
Michigan Law Review
The tension between equality and discretion lies at the heart of some of the most vexing questions of constitutional law. The considerable discretion that many official decisionmakers wield raises the spectre that violations of equality norms will sometimes escape detection. This is true in a variety of settings, whether discretion lies over speakers' access to public fora, implementation of the death penalty, or the recounting of votes. Is the First Amendment violated, for example, when a city ordinance gives local officials broad discretion to determine the conditions under which political demonstrations may take place? Is equal protection denied where the …
Appellate Courts Inside And Out, Maxwell L. Stearns
Appellate Courts Inside And Out, Maxwell L. Stearns
Michigan Law Review
While the United States Supreme Court has been the object of seemingly endless scholarly commentary, the United States Courts of Appeals are just now coming into their own as a subject of independent academic inquiry. This is an important development when one considers that the vast bulk of relevant precedents governing most federal court litigation comes not from the Supreme Court, but rather from the United States Courts of Appeals. Because relatively few courts of appeals decisions are reviewed in the Supreme Court, with rare exception, the federal circuit courts provide the functional equivalent of that Court's proverbial "last word." …