Courts Commons^™

Living With Judicial Elections, Raymond J. Mckoski

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Putting Equality To A Vote: Individual Rights, Judicial Elections, And The Arkansas Supreme Court, Billy Corriher

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law—Why Amending The Consitution To Overrule Citizens United Is The Wrong Way To Fix Campaign Finance In The United States, Zachary Hale

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Enhanced Campaing Finance Disclosure And Recusal Rules To Offset The Influence Of Dark Money In State Supreme Court Elections, Cathy R. Silak, Emily Siess Donnellan

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Intellectual Property Law Professors In Favor Of Judgement As A Matter Of Law, John A. Conway, Mark Mckenna

Court Briefs

No. 3:14-cv-01849-K
Zenimax Media Inc. v. Oculus VR, LLC

From the Summary of ArgumentPlaintiff’s false designation of origin and false endorsement claims, such as they are, rest on the assertion that defendants falsely represented themselves as the origin of intellectual property on which the Oculus Rift is based. Those claims are barred by Dastar v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 539 U.S. 23 (2003), which holds that only confusion regarding the origin of physical goods is actionable under the Lanham Act.

Newroom: Rwu Law Sixth In Nation In Percentage Of Graduates Obtaining State Court Clerkships 6/2/2017, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Chief Justice William Howard Taft's Conception Of Judicial Integrity: The Legal History Of Tumey V. Ohio, Joshua Kastenberg

Cleveland State Law Review

In 1927, Chief Justice William Howard Taft led a unanimous Court to determine that, at minimum, the right to an impartial and independent judiciary meant that the judge had to lack a personal interest in the outcome of the trial. While the decision, Tumey v. Ohio, was based on a judge’s pecuniary interest, it was also part of Taft’s efforts to ensure that the nation’s judges, from the municipal courts to the Supreme Court had the public’s confidence in their integrity. Tumey, therefore, is not simply a decision on pecuniary interests. It can, and should, be applied to …

The Trial Lawyer And The Reptilian Brain: A Critique, Louis J. Sirico, Jr.

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article brings together neuroscience, cultural symbolism, and the strategies of practicing lawyers to critique the reptile strategy, now popular among trial lawyers. The strategy directs the lawyer to trigger the reptilian brains of jurors so that they react instinctively to threats to themselves and their communities. When humans feel threatened, the reptilian brain, the most primitive part of the brain, takes charge and instinctively controls human conduct. Therefore, if a lawyer can make a juror feel threatened, the lawyer makes an appeal to the juror’s reptilian brain and virtually assures a victory. Thus, a lawyer’s argument should intensify the …

Internal Administrative Law, Gillian E. Metzger, Kevin M. Stack

Michigan Law Review

For years, administrative law has been identified as the external review of agency action, primarily by courts. Following in the footsteps of pioneering administrative law scholars, a growing body of recent scholarship has begun to attend to the role of internal norms and structures in controlling agency action. This Article offers a conceptual and historical account of these internal forces as internal administrative law. Internal administrative law consists of the internal directives, guidance, and organizational forms through which agencies structure the discretion of their employees and presidents control the workings of the executive branch. It is the critical means for …

Adverse Interests And Article Iii: A Reply, James E. Pfander, Daniel Birk

Northwestern University Law Review

Scholars and jurists have long sought an explanation for why the Framers of Article III distinguished “Cases” from “Controversies.” In a previous article that cataloged the exercise of federal jurisdiction over uncontested matters, such as pension claims, warrant applications, and naturalization proceedings, we tried to provide an answer to this question. We suggested that, at least as to “cases” arising under federal law, the federal courts could exercise what Roman and civil lawyers called non-contentious jurisdiction or, in the words of Chief Justice Marshall, could hear uncontested claims of right in the form prescribed by law. As for “controversies,” by …

Adverse Interests And Article Iii, Ann Woolhandler

Northwestern University Law Review

In an important article in the Yale Law Journal, James Pfander and Daniel Birk claim that adverseness is not required by Article III for cases arising under federal law. This Article takes the position that Pfander and Birk have not made the case for reconsidering adversity requirements for Article III cases. Adverseness may be present when there is adversity of legal interests, even when adverse argument is not present. From this perspective, a number of Pfander and Birk’s examples of non-contentious jurisdiction manifested adverseness. In rem-type proceedings such as bankruptcy and prize cases required the determination of adverse interests, …

Pro-Prosecution Doctrinal Drift In Criminal Sentencing, Margaret Truesdale

Northwestern University Law Review

Federal criminal sentencing doctrine is growing increasingly favorable to the prosecution. This Note identifies two factors that contribute to this “doctrinal drift.” First, district courts rarely issue written opinions in the sentencing context. Second, prosecutors, unlike defense attorneys, can strategically forego appeal in an individual case to avoid the risk that the lower court’s pro-defense reasoning will be affirmed and become binding precedent. In fact, 99% of all appeals of sentencing decisions are defense appeals. When defendants appeal pro-prosecution lower court decisions, the appellate court usually affirms, in part due to deference. The result is a one-sided body of case …

Making Treaty Implementation More Like Statutory Implementation, Jean Galbraith

Michigan Law Review

Both statutes and treaties are the “supreme law of the land,” and yet quite different practices have developed with respect to their implementation. For statutes, all three branches have embraced the development of administrative law, which allows the executive branch to translate broad statutory directives into enforceable obligations. But for treaties, there is a far more cumbersome process. Unless a treaty provision contains language that courts interpret to be directly enforceable, they will deem it to require implementing legislation from Congress. This Article explores and challenges the perplexing disparity between the administration of statutes and treaties. It shows that the …

The Interplay Of Majority And Minority Religious Rights And The Role Of The Judiciary, Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Fact-Finding In An Age Of Rapid Change: Creative Reforms From Abroad, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Timely Permanency Or Unnecessary Removal?: Tips For Advocates For Children Who Spend Less Than 30 Days In Foster Care, Christopher Church, Monique Mitchell, Vivek Sankaran

Articles

Removal and placement in foster care is child welfare’s most severe intervention, contemplated as “a last resort rather than the first.” Federal law, with an overarching goal of preventing unnecessary removals, bolsters this principle by requiring juvenile and family courts to carefully oversee the removal of children to foster care. Expansive research reminds the field that removal, while often necessary, is not a benign intervention. Physically, legally, and emotionally separating children from their parent(s) can traumatize children in lasting ways. Yet review of federal data concerning children in foster care reveal a troubling narrative: each year, tens of thousands of …

Klabacka V. Nelson, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 24 (May 25, 2017), Christopher Kelly

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) family courts have subject matter jurisdiction in divorce proceedings that involve issues otherwise outside the scope of family courts, (2) parol evidence may not be considered to determine party intent to form separate property agreements and self-settled spendthrift trusts where the written agreements are valid and unambiguous, (3) a court order equalizing assets between different spendthrift trusts is improper because the NRS protects against court orders that move assets from trusts and against moves that do not benefit trust beneficiaries, (4) spendthrift trusts may not be reached for payment of personal obligations not known at …

Injustice Under Law: Perpetuating And Criminalizing Poverty Through The Courts, Judge Lisa Foster

Georgia State University Law Review

Money matters in the justice system. If you can afford to purchase your freedom pretrial, if you can afford to immediately pay fines and fees for minor traffic offenses and municipal code violations, if you can afford to hire an attorney, your experience of the justice system both procedurally and substantively will be qualitatively different than the experience of someone who is poor. More disturbingly, through a variety of policies and practices—some of them blatantly unconstitutional—our courts are perpetuating and criminalizing poverty. And when we talk about poverty in the United States, we are still talking about race, ethnicity, and …

Dueling Grants: Reimagining Cafa’S Jurisdictional Provisions, Tanya Pierce

Georgia State University Law Review

More than a decade after Congress passed the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA), courts continue to disagree as to its application and meaning in a variety of situations, many of which have wide-ranging effects. This article considers a fundamental issue that arises after a certification decision is reached: whether a court’s subject matter jurisdiction under CAFA depends on a class being certified. Specifically, the article considers what happens when a federal court’s subject matter jurisdiction derives solely from CAFA’s minimal diversity jurisdiction provision and a request for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 (Rule 23) …

A Promise Unfulfilled: Challenges To Georgia’S Death Penalty Statute Post-Furman, William Cody Newsome

Georgia State University Law Review

In Furman v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Furman’s counsel. Three Justices agreed that Georgia law, as applied, was arbitrary and potentially discriminatory. Moreover, one Justice challenged the value of the death penalty and doubted it served any of the alleged purposes for which it was employed.

Although many challenges subsequent to Furman have been raised and arguably resolved by the Court, the underlying challenges raised by Furman appear to remain prevalent with the Court. Justice Breyer recently echoed the concurring opinions of Furman in his dissenting opinion from Glossip v. Gross, when he stated: “In …

Supreme Court Institute Annual Report, 2016-2017, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute

SCI Papers & Reports

During the U.S. Supreme Court’s October Term (OT) 2016 – corresponding to the 2016-2017 academic year –the Supreme Court Institute (SCI) provided moot courts for advocates in 100% of the cases heard by the Supreme Court, offered a variety of programs related to the Supreme Court, and continued to integrate the moot court program into the education of Georgetown Law students.

A list of all SCI moot courts held in OT 2016 – arranged by argument sitting and date of moot and including the name and affiliation of each advocate and the number of observers – follows the narrative portion …

Personal Injury Law, Defense V. Plaintiff: A Return To Civility, Daniel Stiffler, Jamie Finizio Bascombe

NSU Law Seminar Series

This particular seminar is designed to educate attorneys on the importance of communicating and navigating a civil case while maintaining a level of professionalism, civility, and integrity to the profession, opposing party, and the court. Learning Outcomes include:

1. How to maintain a level of civility while competently represent clients in civil cases in Florida
2. Review standards of conduct in the context of a lawyer’s responsibility to perceive and protect the image of the profession

The Florida Bar CLE credits - General 2.0, Ethics 0.5 The Florida Bar Certification Credits - Civil Trial 2.0

Rethinking Criminal Contempt, John A.E. Pottow, Jason S. Levin

Articles

It is of course too early to tell whether we are in a new era of bankruptcy judge (dis)respectability. Only time will tell. But this Article performs a specific case study, on one discrete area of bankruptcy court authority, based upon a particular assumption in that regard. The assumption is this: certain high-salience judicial events-here, the recent Supreme Court bankruptcy judge decisions, coupled with earlier constitutional precedents involving the limits of Article III-can trigger overreaction and hysteria. Lower courts may read these Supreme Court decisions as calling into question the permissibility of certain bankruptcy court practices under the Constitution, and …

A Comparative Approach To Counter-Terrorism Legislation And Legal Policy, Paul David Hill Jr

Senior Honors Theses

Since the 9/11 attacks, American legislation and legal policy in regards to classifying and processing captured terrorists has fallen short of being fully effective and lawful. Trial and error by the Bush and Obama administrations has uncovered two key lessons: (1) captured terrorists are not typical prisoners of war and thus their detainment must involve more legal scrutiny than the latter; and (2) captured terrorists are not ordinary criminals and thus the civilian criminal court system, due to constitutional constraints, is not capable of adequately trying every count of terrorism. Other nations, including France and Israel, approach this problem with …

The Impact Of Roe V. Wade (1973) On The American Abortion Rights Movement, Claire M. Adkins

Senior Honors Projects, 2010-2019

My research examines the impact of the Supreme Court case, Roe v. Wade (1973), on the American abortion rights movement during the 1970s. Previous research is divided on the extent of the Court’s influence on social movements and I seek to fill a gap in the previous literature. I conduct an in-depth document analysis to measure the Court’s effect on the abortion rights movement. Specifically, I examine abortion sections from the 1970s feminist publications, “Our Bodies Ourselves” and “off our backs,” to represent the American abortion rights movement. Both publications offer slightly different feminist perspectives with abortion rights advocacy and …

Foster V. Chatman: A Missed Opportunity For Batson And The Peremptory Challenge, Nancy Marder

All Faculty Scholarship

In 2016, the United States Supreme Court decided that the prosecutors in Foster v. Chatman exercised race-based peremptory challenges in violation of Batson v. Kentucky. The Court reached the right result, but missed an important opportunity. The Court should have acknowledged that after thirty years of the Batson experiment, it is clear that Batson is unable to stop discriminatory peremptory challenges. Batson is easy to evade, so discriminatory peremptory challenges persist and the harms from them are significant. The Court could try to strengthen Batson in an effort to make it more effective, but in the end the only way …

The Replacements: Conflicting Standards For Obtaining New Counsel Under The Sixth Amendment, Sharon Finegan

Cleveland State Law Review

In 2006, the Supreme Court handed down a decision in United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez emphasizing the importance of a defendant’s right to counsel of choice under the Sixth Amendment and holding a denial of this right constitutes structural error, requiring automatic reversal. Following that decision, several federal circuit courts and state appellate courts have questioned how to apply this right to circumstances where the right to choice of counsel and the right to appointed counsel overlap. When a defendant seeks to replace retained counsel for appointed counsel, should the standard governing his motion fall under the right to choice of …

Different Voices : Measuring Female Judges' Influence On Women's Rights Issues In The U.S. Courts Of Appeal., Alyson E Hendricks

College of Arts & Sciences Senior Theses

Beginning with President Carter and continuing with each successive president, the federal bench has become more diverse. This has caused scholars to turn their attention to how personal characteristics such as race and sex affect judging. Understanding the effects of gender and race on judging is crucial because white female and minority female judges may bring a different perspective to the bench than their male counterparts due to their shared experiences with discrimination. To fill a gap in the literature, this study examines the impact of women in terms of legal influence and voting behavior. The results demonstrate that women …

The Empirics Of Child Custody, Margaret Ryznar

Cleveland State Law Review

Child custody issues are as American as apple pie, with only a quarter of children seeing their parents married until the end. The legal standard for custody is the best interests of the child, but the greyness of this inquiry allows courts to make difficult judgments. In family law, such discretionary standards govern factually diverse cases and make it difficult to draw conclusions from individual cases. This Article offers an objective measurement in family law by empirically examining a sample of Indiana divorce cases filed during three months in 2008 that involved children. The resulting analysis of child custody and …

Book Review: The Betrayal: The Nuremberg Trials And German Divergence, Anton Weiss-Wendt

Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal

No abstract provided.