Courts Commons^™

Singled Out, Michael Pappas

Publications

David has been "singled out." He is the only one in his neighborhood legally prohibited from building a house. In a town full of residences, his lot alone must remain vacant. This is unequal, but is it unconstitutional?

Courts have continually grappled with this sort of question, vigilantly defending against unfair and unjust singling out. So important is this concern that the Supreme Court has emphasized it as the heart of the Fifth Amendment takings jurisprudence, and an entire Equal Protection doctrine has emerged around it.

However, courts and scholars have yet to critically examine the concept of singling-out, and …

Saving The Public Interest Class Action By Unpacking Theory And Doctrinal Functionality, Suzette M. Malveaux

Publications

No abstract provided.

In The Shadows Of Sunlight: The Effects Of Transparency On State Political Campaigns, Abby K. Wood, Douglas M. Spencer

Publications

In recent years, the courts have invalidated a variety of campaign finance laws while simultaneously upholding disclosure requirements. Courts view disclosure as a less-restrictive means to root out corruption while critics claim that disclosure chills speech and deters political participation. Using individual-level contribution data from state elections between 2000 and 2008, we find that the speech-chilling effects of disclosure are negligible. On average, less than one donor per candidate is likely to stop contributing when the public visibility of campaign contributions increases. Moreover, we do not observe heterogeneous effects for small donors or ideological outliers despite an assumption in First …

Prior Consistent Statements: The Dangers Of Misinterpreting Recently Amended Federal Rule Of Evidence 801(D)(1)(B), Laird C. Kirkpatrick, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

A recent amendment to Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) expands the situations in which prior consistent statements by testifying witnesses can be used as substantive evidence, and not merely as rehabilitating evidence. In this piece, the Authors argue that the revised rule may mislead judges and lawyers to conclude that prior consistent statements are always usable as substantive evidence when offered to rehabilitate a witness. Nothing could be further from the truth. The intent, although hard to discern on the face of the revised rule, is only to allow substantive use of consistent statements that are otherwise admissible to rehabilitate …

Colorado Rule Of Evidence 502: Preserving Privilege And Work Product Protection In Discovery, Christopher B. Mueller, Ronald J. Hedges, Lino S. Lipinsky

Publications

No abstract provided.

Equity And Corporate Law, Mark J. Loewenstein

Publications

The article explores the continuing relevance of the 1991 Delaware Supreme Court decision in Schnell v. Chris-Craft Industries, Inc., in particular the extent to which evolving concepts of good faith have, or should, displace the free-wheeling equity doctrine of Schnell.

Same-Sex Marriage, Federalism, And Judicial Supremacy, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

Justice Kennedy's opinion in United States v. Windsor is characterized by a number of strained and wavering constitutional claims. Prominent among these is the argument that the principle of federalism calls into question the congressional decision to adopt the traditional definition of marriage, which the state of New York rejected. An examination of earlier federalism cases demonstrates that Kennedy's appreciation for federalism is in fact severely limited and suggests and that his lax use of legal authority is directly if perversely related to this limited appreciation.

Federalism cases prior to Windsor show that Justice Kennedy supports state authority only when …

Trans-Substantivity Beyond Procedure, Suzette M. Malveaux

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Administrative State's Passive Virtues, Sharon B. Jacobs

Publications

Fifty years ago, Alexander Bickel famousy suggested that courts use tools like standing, ripeness, and the political question doctrine to avoid reaching the merits of difficult cases. Yet despite the increasingly central role of administrative agencies in government, there have been no efforts to date to apply Bickel's insights to the bureaucracy. This Article remedies that deficit. The Article provides a three-part taxonomy of administrative restraint and offers case studies from federal agencies such as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Fish and Wildlife Service. It argues that agencies sometimes use restraint strategically for reasons …

(In)Competence In Appellate And District Court Brief Writing On Rule 12 And 56 Motions, Scott A. Moss

Publications

No abstract provided.

Undue Burdens In Texas, Jennifer S. Hendricks

Publications

No abstract provided.

Tenth Amendment Challenges After Bond V. United States, Scott G. Thompson, Christopher Klimmek

Publications

In its recent decision in Bond v. United States, the Supreme Court explained that because the Tenth Amendment "secures the freedom of the individual," private parties who otherwise satisfy Article III's standing requirements and other prudential requirements may challenge federal laws as violating the Tenth Amendment. In so doing, the Court reversed the majority of circuit courts that have addressed the issue and removed a significant categorical bar to individual Tenth Amendment challenges. This Article explains Bond's holding and explores its implications for future Tenth Amendment challenges by private parties.

Although Bond contains some expansive language regarding the role …

Incitement To Riot In The Age Of Flash Mobs, Margot E. Kaminski

Publications

As people increasingly use social media to organize both protests and robberies, government will try to regulate these calls to action. With an eye to this intensifying dynamic, this Article reviews First Amendment jurisprudence on incitement and applies it to existing statutes on incitement to riot at a common law, state, and federal level. The article suggests that First Amendment jurisprudence has a particularly tortuous relationship with regulating speech directed to crowds. It examines current crowd psychology to suggest which crowd behavior, if any, should as a matter of policy be subject to regulation. It concludes that many existing incitement-to-riot …

Suing Courts, Frederic Bloom, Christopher Serkin

Publications

This Article argues for a new and unexpected mechanism of judicial accountability: suing courts. Current models of court accountability focus almost entirely on correcting legal errors. A suit against the court would concentrate on something different--on providing transition relief, by way of legal remedy, to those bearing the heaviest burdens of desirable legal change. These suits may at first appear impossible. But suing courts is conceptually rational and mechanically reasonable, a tool that eases legal transitions while navigating the many hurdles modern doctrine puts in the way. This Article sets out the first complete account of how, where, and why …

The Second-Class Class Action: How Courts Thwart Wage Rights By Misapplying Class Action Rules, Scott A. Moss, Nantiya Ruan

Publications

Courts apply to wage rights cases an aggressive scrutiny that not only disadvantages low-wage workers, but is fundamentally incorrect on the law. Rule 23 class actions automatically cover all potential members if the court grants plaintiffs' class certification motion. But for certain employment rights cases--mainly wage claims but also age discrimination and gender equal pay claims--29 U.S. C. § 216(b) allows not class actions but "collective actions" covering just those opting in affirmatively. Yet courts in collective actions assume a gatekeeper role just as they do in Rule 23 class actions, disallowing many actions by requiring a certification motion proving …

Examining The International Judicial Function: International Courts As Dispute Resolvers, Anna Spain

Publications

This article examines the judicial function of international courts by considering both what it is and what it ought to be. The article identifies and describes two distinct functions - dispute settlement and peace promotion - and explores the tensions that exist in pursuing these two aims. It then introduces a third way of understanding the international judicial function that respects international courts’ traditional role as dispute settlers while allowing for their more engaged and proactive function as peacemakers. This third approach conceptualizes that the role of international courts is to resolve disputes. Doing so requires understanding courts as entities …

Wilkes V. Springside Nursing Home, Inc.: A Historical Perspective, Mark J. Loewenstein

Publications

No abstract provided.

Class Actions At The Crossroads: An Answer To Wal-Mart V. Dukes, Suzette M. Malveaux

Publications

The Supreme Court has recently decided to hear argument in the largest private-employer civil rights case in American history, Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. This historic case involves up to 1.5 million women suing Wal-Mart, one of the largest companies in the world, for alleged gender discrimination in pay and promotions, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Like many employees who challenge companywide employment discrimination, the plaintiffs in Dukes brought their case as a class action pursuant to Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and sought injunctive and declaratory relief, …

Overcoming Babel’S Curse: Adapting The Doctrine Of Foreign Equivalents, Jonathan Skinner

Publications

No abstract provided.

Integration Matters: Rethinking The Architecture Of International Dispute Resolution, Anna Spain

Publications

International law promotes global peace and security by providing mechanisms for the pacific settlement of international disputes. This Article examines these mechanisms and their place in the architecture of the international dispute resolution ("IDR") system. The Article identifies three core deficiencies of the IDR system that limit its effectiveness and capacity. First, the international legal system has prioritized the development of adjudication over other forms of dispute resolution; the judicialization of international disputes and the proliferation of courts and tribunals evidence this. However, adjudication is limited in its capacity to resolve disputes that involve non-state parties and extra-legal issues. This …

Tribal Civil Judicial Jurisdiction Over Nonmembers: A Practical Guide For Judges, Sarah Krakoff

Publications

This Article provides a summary of the law of tribal civil jurisdiction over persons who are not members of the governing tribe ("nonmembers'), followed by an analysis of trends in the lower courts. It was written to respond to a consensus view at the University of Colorado Law Review Symposium: "The Next Great Generation of American Indian Law Judges," in January 2010, that a concise, practical, yet in-depth treatment of this subject would be useful to the judiciary as well as practitioners. The Article traces the development of the Supreme Court's common law of tribal civil judicial jurisdiction from 1959 …

The Traveling Librarian: Extending Library Services To A Statewide Judiciary, Robert M. Linz

Publications

When patrons can't come to the library, sometimes the librarian must go to the patrons. That is exactly what happened this past year in the state of Colorado.

The Diverging Meaning Of Good Faith, Mark J. Loewenstein

Publications

This article explores the meaning of "good faith" in the context of corporations and unincorporated entities. The courts, particularly in Delaware, have developed two different approaches. In the corporate arena, the courts are fashioning a notion of good faith that seems to require an examination of director motivations. In the unincorporated arena, good faith has a meaning grounded in contract law. These are two different concepts and reflect the fundamental differences between corporations and unincorporated entities, with the former based on fiduciary duties and the latter on contract. There are, however, indications that this "divergence" is starting to disappear, and …

The Courts Under President Obama, Scott A. Moss

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Expanding Use Of The Res Gestae Doctrine, H. Patrick Furman, Ann England

Publications

This article provides a brief history of the doctrine of res gestae and an analysis of its current usage in both Colorado state and federal courts.

Jurisdiction's Noble Lie, Frederic M. Bloom

Publications

This Article makes sense of a lie. It shows how legal jurisdiction depends on a falsehood--and then explains why it would.

To make this novel argument, this Article starts where jurisdiction does. It recounts jurisdiction's foundations--its tests and motives, its histories and rules. It then seeks out jurisdictional reality, critically examining a side of jurisdiction we too often overlook. Legal jurisdiction may portray itself as fixed and unyielding, as natural as the force of gravity, and as stable as the firmest ground. But jurisdiction is in fact something different. It is a malleable legal invention that bears a false rigid …

Delivering User-Centric Services At The Colorado Supreme Court Library, Robert M. Linz

Publications

No abstract provided.

No Two-Stepping In The Laboratories: State Deference Standards And Their Implications For Improving The Chevron Doctrine, Michael Pappas

Publications

No abstract provided.

Cooper's Quiet Demise (A Short Response To Professor Strauss), Frederic M. Bloom

Publications

No abstract provided.

State Courts Unbound, Frederic M. Bloom

Publications

We may not think that state courts disobey binding Supreme Court precedent, but occasionally state courts do. In a number of important cases, state courts have actively defied apposite Supreme Court doctrine, and often it is the Court itself that has invited them to.

This Article shows state courts doing the unthinkable: flouting Supreme Court precedent, sometimes at the Court's own behest. The idea of state court defiance may surprise us. It is not in every case, after all, that state courts affirmatively disobey. But rare events still have their lessons, and we should ask how and why they emerge. …