Courts Commons^™

Toward A History Of Children As Witnesses, David S. Tanenhaus, William Bush

Scholarly Works

This brief essay offers a selective overview of recent trends in the historical scholarship on American childhood from the origins of the American Revolution to the early years of the Cold War. This overview of the literature has two purposes. First, it highlights recent socio-cultural scholarship that presents substantive challenges to the conventional ways of understanding the history of children and the law. Second, in so doing, it points out that legal histories concerned solely with doctrinal matters can, and often do, present a limited and distorted window into the past. Instead, the essay argues that the place of children, …

Of Metaphor, Metonymy, And Corporate Money: Rhetorical Choices In Supreme Court Decisions On Campaign Finance Regulation, Linda L. Berger

Scholarly Works

This Article examines the metaphorical and metonymical framing of corporate money in Supreme Court decisions about campaign finance regulation. Metaphorical influences (corporation as a person, spending money as speech, marketplace of ideas as the model for First Amendment analysis) affected early decisions about the regulation of corporate spending in election campaigns. Later, a metonymical move to isolate corporate money and then to focus on its malevolent tendencies displaced the earlier view of corporate money as speech. This movement was best depicted in McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, 540 U.S. 93 (2003), the Supreme Court's 2003 decision on the Bipartisan Campaign …

Lawyer Professional Responsibility In Litigation, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

A perennially-vexing litigation issue concerns the limits of permissible attorney argument. More than a few lawyers have been tripped up by the occasional fuzziness of the line between aggressive advocacy and improper appeals to passion or prejudice. See Craig Lee Montz, Why Lawyers Continue to Cross the Line in Closing Argument: An Examination of Federal and State Cases, 28 Ohio N.U. L. Rev. 67 (2001-2002)(problem of violations results from lack of uniformity and clarity of ground rules as well as errors of counsel). In Cohen v. Lioce, 149 P.3d 916 (Nev. 2006) the Nevada Supreme Court both provided significant guidance …

The Myopia Of U.S. V. Martinelli: Extraterritorial Jurisdiction In The 21st Century, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

Beginning in January 1999 and continuing through January 2000, a U.S. soldier began frequenting an off-post Internet cafe in Darmstadt, Germany, called the Netzwork Café. There he would download images of child pornography and search Internet websites, logging onto Internet chat rooms in order to communicate with individuals willing to send him images of naked children and children engaged in sex acts.

Specialist Martinelli was eventually caught and charged with various violations of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A for knowingly mailing, transporting or shipping child pornography in interstate or foreign commerce (by computer); knowingly receiving child pornography that had been mailed, …

The Double Standard In Judicial Selection, Edwin Meese Iii

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reviving The Right To Vote, Ellen D. Katz

Articles

Losers in partisan districting battles have long challenged the resulting districting plans under seemingly unrelated legal doctrines. They have filed lawsuits alleging malapportionment, racial gerrymandering, and racial vote dilution, and they periodically prevail. Many election law scholars worry about these lawsuits, claiming that they needlessly "racialize" fundamentally political disputes, distort important legal doctrines designed for other purposes, and provide an inadequate remedy for a fundamentally distinct electoral problem. I am not convinced. This Article argues that the application of distinct doctrines to invalidate or diminish what are indisputably partisan gerrymanders is not necessarily problematic, and that the practice may well …

Who Knew - The Admissibility Of Subsequent Remedial Measures When Defendants Are Without Knowledge Of The Injuries, Ryan Vacca, Mark G. Boyko

Faculty Publications

Federal Rule of Evidence 407 and equivalent state court rules prohibit the introduction of subsequent remedial measures for the purpose of demonstrating negligence, culpable conduct, or product defect. The rule breaks down, however, in application and purpose, when a defendant undertakes a new safety measure after the plaintiff's injury but before the defendant had knowledge of the loss. Such a situation is not uncommon. Would-be defendants frequently improve their products and product safety, whether in response to injuries incurred by other users, business pressures, or simply advances in the state of the art and scientific knowledge. Toxic exposure cases, where …

Adapting To Administrative Law's Erie Doctrine, Kathryn A. Watts

Articles

This Article looks to the federalism context and draws on the federal courts' experience adapting to the Court's landmark decision in Erie Railroad Company v. Tompkins. Much like Brand X, the Court's Erie decision, which commanded federal courts to apply state law in all cases not governed by positive federal law, significantly reduced the lawmaking power of the federal courts by putting the federal courts in the position of interpreting law that they cannot definitively construe. Although Erie seemed simple enough to adhere to when state law provided a clear answer, Erie posed a serious dilemma when federal courts …

Crimes Against Humanity At The Extraordinary Chambers In The Courts Of Cambodia: Is A Connection With Armed Conflict Required, 24 Ucla Pac. Basin L.J. 125 (2007), Stuart K. Ford

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Faces Of Open Courts And The Civil Right To Counsel, 37 U. Balt. L. Rev. 21 (2007), Steven D. Schwinn

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Assessing The Revised Arizona Local Rules Of Federal Procedure, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The United States District Court for the District of Arizona has generally not contributed to a significant difficulty with modem federal court practice: local procedural proliferation. Each of the remaining ninety-three federal district courts has prescribed and applied numerous local strictures that govern admiralty, bankruptcy, civil, criminal and evidentiary practice, while mounting numbers of these local provisos conflict with or repeat analogous federal rules or statutes. In contrast, the United States District Court for the District of Arizona has promulgated and enforced relatively few local measures, and only a tiny percentage of them are redundant or inconsistent with corresponding federal …

Battle Of The Branches: The Separation Of Powers Doctrine In State Education Funding Suits, Sarah Seo

Faculty Scholarship

What is the scope of judicial power to enforce positive rights, such as the right to education? This Note analyzes litigation outcomes in state education finance lawsuits to examine how state courts exercise their authority within the limits of the separation of powers doctrine. The Note argues that practical, non-legal factors play an important role in a judge's decision to grant remedies addressing unconstitutional legislative inaction to provide an adequate public education. In conclusion, the Note discusses the efficacy of education litigation in light of the judicial s jurisdictional limits, as well as the realities of state politics.

Anti-Federalist Procedure, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

"[T]he new federal government will ... be disinclined to invade the rights of the individual States, or the prerogatives of their governments."

"[T]he Constitution of the United States ... recognizes and preserves the autonomy and independence of the States-independence in their legislative and independence in their judicial departments. . . . Any interference with either, except as [constitutionally] permitted, is an invasion of the authority of the State and, to that extent, a denial of its independence."

The understanding expressed by these opening quotes-that the national government was designed to be one of limited powers that would refrain from encroaching …

The Kerr Principle, State Action, And Legal Rights, Donald J. Herzog

Articles

A Baltimore library refused to admit Louise Kerr to a training program because she was black. Not that it had anything against blacks, but its patrons did. When Kerr launched a civil suit against the library alleging a violation of equal protection of the laws, the courts credited the library's claim that it had no racist purpose, but Kerr still prevailed-even though the case occurred before Title VII and Brown v. Board of Education. Here a neutral and generally applicable rule ("serve the patrons"), when coupled with particular facts about private parties (the white patrons dislike blacks), yielded an …

Crawford, Davis, And Way Beyond, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

Until 1965, the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution hardly mattered. It was not applicable against the states, and therefore had no role whatsoever in the vast majority of prosecutions. Moreover, if a federal court was inclined to exclude evidence of an out-of-court statement, it made little practical difference whether the court termed the statement hearsay or held that the evidence did not comply with the Confrontation Clause.

Forfeiture Of The Confrontation Right After Crawford And Davis, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

So my topic this morning is on forfeiture of the confrontation right, which I think plays a central role in confrontation doctrine. And to try to present that, let me state the entirety of confrontation doctrine as briefly as I can. This is, at least, what I think the doctrine is and what it can be: A testimonial statement should not be admissible against an accused to prove the truth of what it asserts unless the accused either has had or will have an opportunity to confront the witness-which should occur at trial unless the witness is then unavailable-or has …

Doctors & Juries, Philip G. Peters Jr.

Faculty Publications

Legislation is pending in both houses of Congress to transfer medical malpractice cases from civil juries to administrative health courts. The Institute of Medicine also wants to take malpractice cases away from juries through a system of binding early settlement offers. Each of these proposals is premised on the assumption that juries lack the capacity to resolve medical malpractice disputes fairly. This article evaluates that premise. It collects and synthesizes three decades of empirical research on jury decision-making, updating the seminal review done by Neil Vidmar over a decade ago.Four important findings emerge from the data. First, negligence matters. Plaintiffs …

2006 Government Contract Decisions Of The Federal Circuit, David W. Burgett, William F. Ferreira, Allison D. Pugsley, Deborah A. Raviv

American University Law Review

In 2006, the Federal Circuit issued over two hundred and fifty precedential opinions and orders. This article discusses sixteen precedent-setting opinions involving government contract law issues, setting forth the relevant facts, the Federal Circuit’s analysis, and key points for practitioners to glean from each case. This article also includes a discussion of the Federal Circuit’s September 2006 opinion regarding the TRICARE Pharmacy Benefits Program (“TPBP”) refund program, a case that the pharmaceutical industry watched closely. The decisions have been grouped into the following categories: jurisdiction, contract interpretation, costs, contract termination, bid protests, and patent rights.

What Process Is Due In The Adjudication Of Erisa Claims?, 40 J. Marshall L. Rev. 811 (2007), Mark D. Debofsky

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Capital Defense Representation, Norman Lefstein

Indiana Law Journal

Symposium: Toward A Model Death Penalty Code: The Massachusetts Governor's Council Report.

Roscoe Pound Round-Table Discussion, Judith Resnik, Leroy Rountree Hassell Sr., Margaret H. Marshall, Clifford W. Taylor, Lucy A. Dalglish, Luke Bierman, Mark S. Curriden

Indiana Law Journal

Conference of Chief Justices and Conference of State Court Administrators Annual Meeting July 29-August 2, 2006 Indianapolis, Indiana.

The State Of The Onion: Peeling Back The Layers Of America's Ambivalence Toward Judicial Independence, Charles G. Geyh

Indiana Law Journal

Conference of Chief Justices and Conference of State Court Administrators Annual Meeting July 29-August 2, 2006 Indianapolis, Indiana.

From Kiev To Columbus: A Perspective On Judicial Independence, Thomas J. Moyer

Indiana Law Journal

Conference of Chief Justices and Conference of State Court Administrators Annual Meeting July 29-August 2, 2006 Indianapolis, Indiana.

Building Support For Strong, Fair, And Impartial Courts, Michael A. Wolff

Indiana Law Journal

Conference of Chief Justices and Conference of State Court Administrators Annual Meeting July 29-August 2, 2006 Indianapolis, Indiana.

Evidence-Based Practices And State Sentencing Policy: Ten Policy Initiatives To Reduce Recidivism, Roger K. Warren

Indiana Law Journal

Conference of Chief Justices and Conference of State Court Administrators Annual Meeting July 29-August 2, 2006 Indianapolis, Indiana.

Distinguishing Certification From Abstention In Diversity Cases: Postponement Versus Abdication Of The Duty To Exercise Jurisdiction, Deborah Challener

Journal Articles

This Article argues that a federal court does not abdicate its duty to exercise its jurisdiction when it certifies a question in a diversity case; instead, the court merely postpones the exercise of its jurisdiction. Thus, federal courts need not limit certification in diversity cases to exceptional circumstances.

National Interests, Foreign Injuries, And Federal Forum Non Conveniens, Elizabeth T. Lear

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article argues that the federal forum non conveniens doctrine subverts critical national interests in international torts cases. For over a quarter century, federal judges have assumed that foreign injury cases, particularly those filed by foreign plaintiffs, are best litigated abroad. This assumption is incorrect. Foreign injuries caused by multinational corporations who tap the American market implicate significant national interests in compensation and/or deterrence. Federal judges approach the forum non conveniens decision as if it were a species of choice of law, as opposed to a choice of forum question. Analyzing the cases from an adjudicatory perspective reveals that in …

Putting Separation Of Powers Into Practice: Reflections On Senator Schumer's Essay, Neil J. Kinkopf, Patricia Wald

Faculty Publications By Year

No abstract provided.

Popular Dissatisfaction With The Administration Of Justice: A Retrospective (And A Look Ahead), Barry Friedman

Indiana Law Journal

Conference of Chief Justices and Conference of State Court Administrators Annual Meeting July 29-August 2, 2006 Indianapolis, Indiana.

Governing By Network: The Answer To Pound's Unanticipated Dissatisfaction, Stephen Goldsmith

Indiana Law Journal

Conference of Chief Justices and Conference of State Court Administrators Annual Meeting July 29-August 2, 2006 Indianapolis, Indiana.