Courts Commons^™

Taking Courthouse Discrimination Seriously: The Role Of Judges As Ethical Leaders, Susan Saab Fortney

Faculty Scholarship

Sexual misconduct allegations against Alex Kozinski, a once powerful judge in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9^th Circuit, spotlighted concerns related to sexual harassment in the judiciary. Following news reports related to the alleged misconduct, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. charged a working group with examining safeguards to deal with inappropriate conduct in the judicial workplace. Based on recommendations made in the Report of the Federal Judiciary Workplace Conduct Working Group, the Judicial Conference approved a number of reforms and improvements related to workplace conduct in the federal judiciary. The reforms included revising the Code of …

Empowering The Courts To Order The Use Of Amicable Dispute Resolution: The Singapore Rules Of Court 2021, Dorcas Quek Anderson

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

The civil justice regime in Singapore entered a new phase of radical reforms with effect from 1 April 2022. The reforms have substantially expanded the role of amicable dispute resolution (ADR). Parties have a duty to consider ADR prior to and during civil proceedings. More significantly, the courts have been empowered to order parties to attempt ADR, taking into account the ideals of the Rules of Court and all relevant circumstances. This note analyses the key reforms relating to the use of ADR with reference to comparable English developments. It discusses the broad yet ambivalent scope of ADR that could …

Appointing And Training Judges In Egypt And Comparative Systems, Moataz Muhammad Al-Saghir Aidaros

Theses and Dissertations

The topic of the paper is very important, as it comes up at a time when the Egyptians have come to a point that reforming Egypt’s justice system is a hopeless case. This is due to the outdated and inefficient way of thinking and performing in the judiciary. Thus the goal of this paper is to make an intellectual contribution to a sustainable reform program of the Egyptian judiciary and namely the systems of judicial appointment and judicial training using their roles as agents of progress and development. This aspiring research argues that the Higher Council of Judicial Entities and …

How The Conviction And Sentencing Of "Tiger Mandingo" Modernized Missouri's Hiv-Related Statutes In 2021, Ryan Jay Mcelhose

Journal of Law and Health

Michael Johnson or “Tiger Mandingo” as he referred to himself on social media, engaged in sexual acts with six different men, all of whom claimed that Michael lied about living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). As a result, the State of Missouri charged him with recklessly infecting a partner with HIV exposing or attempting to expose another with HIV. With contradictory trial testimony, no genetic fingerprint testing, and little to no questioning of his sexual partners’ credibility, the jury found Michael Johnson guilty of five felony counts which resulted in a 30-year prison sentence. Ultimately the Missouri Court of Appeals …

You Be The Judge: Analyzing When The Federal Arbitration Act's Judicial Review Standards Apply In State Court, Max Birmingham

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article addresses whether, when the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) governs an arbitration, the FAA’s judicial review standards apply in state court and preempt application of different state law judicial review standards. This argument proceeds as follows: Part I provides an introduction. Part II analyzes the procedural reform intent of the FAA and why the statute seeks to standardize the arbitration process. Part III reviews the judicial review of arbitration awards as promulgated in Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc. Part IV reviews the generations of FAA cases which have been held to be preempted by SCOTUS. Part V …

Alumna Doris Pryor, ’03, Nominated To Seventh Circuit, James Owsley Boyd

Keep Up With the Latest News from the Law School (blog)

President Joe Biden announced three judicial nominees on May 25, including the Hon. Doris L. Pryor—a 2003 graduate of the Maurer School of Law—to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

The Legacy Of Johnson V. Darr: The 1925 Decision Of The All-Woman Texas Supreme Court, Jeffrey D. Dunn

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Texas Supreme Court case of Johnson v. Darr,[1] the first case decided in any state by an all-woman appellate court, was a singular event in American legal history. On January 9, 1925, three women lawyers appointed by Texas Governor Pat Neff met at the state capitol in Austin to issue rulings solely on one case involving conflicting claims to several residential properties in El Paso. The special court was appointed because the three elected justices recused themselves over a conflict of interest involving one of the litigants, a popular fraternal organization called Woodmen of the World. The special …

Protecting The Constitution While Protecting Victims: Challenges To Pro Se Cross-Examination, Katharine L. Manning

Brooklyn Law Review

Defendants have constitutional rights to cross-examine witnesses and to represent themselves. But when these rights are combined, they can have devastating effects on crime victims. All too often, defendants use the rights in a last-ditch effort to harass, bully, and intimidate the crime’s victims, sometimes leading to a dismissal of charges altogether, as victims withdraw their testimony to avoid personal cross-examination by the defendant. It does not have to be this way. Numerous courts have allowed standby counsel to conduct cross-examination of the victim within constitutional constraints. This article explores the limitations courts have imposed on pro se cross-examination to …

Defense Counsel’S Cross Purposes: Prior Conviction Impeachment Of Prosecution Witnesses, Anna Roberts

Brooklyn Law Review

A broad scholarly coalition supports the prohibition or diminution of the impeachment of criminal defendants with their convictions. Yet scholars should pay more attention to the flipside arrangement: impeachment of prosecution witnesses by defense counsel. First, because those engaged in reform efforts need to resolve the competing interests: constitutional arguments on behalf of the defense, but, on the other hand, concerns about a tool that (regardless of the nature of the witness) risks reinforcing biases and stereotypes. Second, because the impossibility of adequate resolution is itself important to note. Whether one considers the conflicting values of rule-makers deciding whether to …

What Are Victim Impact Statements For?, Susan A. Bandes

Brooklyn Law Review

In Payne v. Tennessee, the US Supreme Court upheld the admission of victim impact statements (VIS) on the ground that they provide valuable information to the sentencer. In the three decades since, two additional rationales for VIS have become ascendant: most prominently, a therapeutic rationale, and more recently, a public education rationale. In this article, I expand upon my critiques of the informational and therapeutic rationales in light of a growing body of empirical evidence about how VIS affect both sentencers and crime victims. Focusing on the powerful and viral VIS delivered at the Larry Nassar guilty plea hearings and …

International Courts & Judicial Affairs, Sara Ochs, Haydee Dijkstal, William Dunlap, Kabir Duggal, Joo Marqal Martins, Emily C. Westphalen, Ed Felter

The Year in Review

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Amicus Curiae Notre Dame Law School Religious Liberty Initiative, Megan M. Wold, John A. Meiser

Court Briefs

No. 22-cv-000067
Columbus City School District v. State of Ohio

Judge Jaiza N. Page

From the Summary of Argument

Under Count 4 of their complaint, the plaintiffs ask this Court to do something that it unquestionably may not: invalidate Ohio's longstanding EdChoice Scholarship Program on the theory that it violates the "no-funding" provision of Article VI, § 2 of the Ohio Constitution, which bars any "religious or other sect" from receiving "any part of the school funds of this state." See Compl. ¶¶ 142-52. Under both state and federal law, this Court must dismiss that claim.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Catholic Medical Association And Coptic Medical Association Of North America In Support Of Appellees, Eric N. Kniffin, John A. Meiser, Francesca M. Genova

Court Briefs

No. 2021CA1855
Barbara Morris v. Centura Health Corporation

Appeal from: Colorado District Court, Arapahoe County Case No. 2019CV31980 (Hon. Peter Frederick Michaelson)

From the Summary of Argument

At its core, this case concerns a religious hospital’s right to provide care in accordance with its faith commitments. Centura Health is a Christian healthcare system that is composed of Catholic and Seventh-day Adventist hospitals, including St. Anthony Hospital, the Catholic Hospital for which Dr. Morris worked. In service of their religious mission, Centura Health and St. Anthony Hospital (collectively, “Centura”) require their doctors to abide by the Ethical and Religious Directives for …

All Of The Products, None Of The Liability: Examining The Supreme Court Of Ohio's Decision In Stiner V. Amazon.Com, Inc., Danny O'Connor

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Covid Silver Lining? How Telework May Be A Reasonable Accommodation After All, Baylee Kalmbach

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Defense Of Self And Home: The Problems With Limiting Second Amendment Rights For Young Adults Based On Their Age, Andrew White

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Tipping Point In Ohio: The Primacy Model As A Path To A Consistent Application Of Judicial Federalism, The Honorable Pierre Bergeron

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Professor Derek T. Muller As Amici Curiae In Support Of No Party, Michael Francisco, Michael A. Brody, Derek T. Muller

Court Briefs

No. 22-11299
Marjorie Taylor Greene v. Secretary of State for the State of Georgia

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
No. 1:22-cv-01294-AT

From the Summary of Argument

Appellees present an issue that seeks something unprecedented: that this Court be the first federal appeals court in history to approve the State’s power to disqualify a congressional candidate. But States lack the power to exclude a congressional candidate from the ballot over a qualification that a candidate might ultimately meet when she presents her credentials to Congress. The district court’s decision should be reversed.

Pov: What Rights Could Unravel Next, In Light Of Draft Opinion By Scotus Overturning Roe V. Wade, Robert L. Tsai

Shorter Faculty Works

Beyond what Alito’s draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization portends for the future of abortion rights is the striking method of analysis he employs in the reported draft. Despite his many efforts to reassure that the opinion “does not undermine” other constitutional rights “in any way,” it actually outlines a roadmap for the withdrawal of other cherished constitutional rights.

Standing For Democracy: Is Democracy A Procedural Right In Vacuo? A Democratic Perspective On Procedural Violations As A Basis For Article Iii Standing, Helen Hershkoff, Stephen Loffredo

Buffalo Law Review

Many commentators express concern that democracy in the United States is under threat, whether from the pressure of concentrated wealth and structural racism, government secrecy and authoritarian tendencies, an outdated constitutional structure and old-fashioned corruption, or perhaps a combination of them all. Against this background, this Article argues that the Supreme Court’s treatment of procedural rights for determining standing—the key that opens the door to federal court—is an overlooked factor in contributing to democratic erosion. According to the Court, violation of a congressionally conferred procedural right that does not safeguard some separate, non-procedural, concrete interest of plaintiff—a “procedural right in …

Examination Of Eviction Filings In Lancaster County, Nebraska, 2019–2021, Ryan Sullivan

Nebraska College of Law: Faculty Publications

The study examined and analyzed eviction filings and proceedings in Nebraska, with a specific focus on Lancaster County—the home to the State’s capital, Lincoln. The primary objective of this study is to place eviction proceedings under a microscope to gain a better understanding of the volume of evictions in Nebraska, and whether the statutorily mandated processes are being followed. The study also attempts to capture the impact of certain external factors present during the period examined. Such factors include the COVID-19 pandemic and various eviction moratoria in place during 2020 and 2021, as well as the increased availability of legal …

Forumless: Why Victims Of The Uyghur Crisis Should Be Able To Vindicate Their Claims In Federal Court, Chase Archer

Texas A&M Law Review

U.S. courts can serve as forums for victims of international human rights abuses to litigate claims against foreign defendants. Oftentimes, U.S. courts are the only option for foreign litigants who are unable to seek remedies in their own countries or in international courts. This Comment discusses the difficulties a victim of the Uyghur crisis would face attempting to use U.S. courts to litigate claims against the Chinese government or government officials under existing law. The purpose of this Comment is not to address any potential challenge to a claim but rather to address the claim preclusions common to foreign plaintiffs …

Using Law Clerks To Improve Efficiency In Jamaican Courts, Sha-Shana Crichton

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Mubita Mwananuka V Armaguard Security Caz Appeal No. 201/2021, O'Brien Kaaba

SAIPAR Case Review

The Court of Appeal of Zambia, in the case of Mubita Mwananuka v Armaguard Security CAZ Appeal No. 201/2021, delivered a Ruling on 3rd August 2022 to divest the High Court General List of jurisdiction over employment matters. I argue that this decision is in clear violation of the Constitution and demonstrates bewildering disregard of precedents by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, which bind the Court of Appeal.

Swimming Up The Stream Of Commerce: How Plaintiffs In Products Liability Litigation Are Disadvantaged By Current Personal Jurisdiction Doctrine, Lily S. Smith

University of Richmond Law Review

The growth of e-commerce has facilitated an increasing number of products’ travel, frequently across state and international lines. This development has subsequently increased litigation between parties who are of diverse residencies. These disputes have challenged the fundamental territorial principles that established early personal jurisdiction doctrine. Moreover, unprecedented corporate expansion—both geographically and economically—has created an environment that has outgrown a doctrine focused on protecting defendants’ rights. As courts are beginning to reform their analysis in products liability litigation towards finding Amazon and others like it strictly liable for injuries caused by products sold on their sites, Amazon will have to find …

Stare Decisis And Intersystemic Adjudication, Nina Varsava

Notre Dame Law Review

Interpreting and following precedent is a complicated business. Various reasonable but conflicting methods of ascertaining the legal effect of precedent exist. Differences between practices of precedent or doctrines of stare decisis are particularly salient between legal systems or jurisdictions. For example, a state’s judges might embrace different stare decisis norms than federal judges. This situation presents a major quandary for intersystemic jurisprudence that has been largely overlooked in the scholarly literature.

Are law-applying judges in the intersystemic context bound by the law-supplying jurisdiction’s methods of interpreting precedent? For example, when the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals adjudicates a question of …

Combating Recidivism, Shaylin Daley

Senior Honors Projects

SHAYLIN DALEY (Psychology) Combating Recidivism Sponsor: Lisa Holley (Political Science) Many people believe that criminals cannot be helped. It is evident that at least some of society shuns people who break laws and have negative views about the amount of money spent on detaining inmates. Thousands of individuals are released from United States prisons a day. Many of these individuals have no plan in place for their return home and are sent into the streets with nothing except for a jail ID. Most of these people will end up returning to prison. A good sum of these people face problems …

Completing Expungement, Brian M. Murray

University of Richmond Law Review

The limits of expungement are where the hope for real reentry meet the desire for criminal justice transparency. That a criminal record, ordered expunged by a judge after a long and arduous process, continues to exist in the world of private actors is a cold, harsh reality for those attempting to reenter civil society. It is also reassurance for parents hiring a babysitter, school districts seeking new employees, and employers concerned about workplace liability. Not to mention, the thought that all records of criminal justice adjudication could be purged forever intuitively sounds Orwellian, even in an age where surveillance, whether …

Rethinking Retroactive Rulemaking: Solving The Problem Of Adjudicative Deference, Gwendolyn Savitz

University of Richmond Law Review

The Chevron doctrine enables courts to defer to authoritative, legally binding agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes. Though more frequently applied when reviewing rulemaking, the doctrine is actually more powerful when applied to an adjudication. In an adjudication, the agency can attach consequences to past actions made before the interpretation announced in the adjudication itself. Since such a determination will receive deference on review, this declaration effectively becomes a new rule, having gone through neither public notice or public comment. Not only does it become a new rule, it becomes a new rule that is effective retroactively. It is illogical to …

Redefining The Badges Of Slavery, Nicholas Serafin

University of Richmond Law Review

Section 2 of the Thirteenth Amendment grants Congress the authority to eliminate the “badges and incidents” of slavery. What constitutes an incident of slavery is clear: the incidents of slavery are the legal restrictions, such as submission to a master and a ban on the ownership of productive property, that were inherent in the institution of slavery itself. What constitutes a badge of slavery is far less certain, and relatively few legal scholars have examined the historical meaning of the metaphor. Nevertheless, there has emerged a renewed interest in Section 2, such that the literature now abounds with proposals for …