Courts Commons^™

Admiralty - Shipowners’ Limited Liability Act - A Shipowner Cannot Invoke The Act To Limit His Liability For Wreck Removal Expenses Since A Statutory Duty To Remove A Sunken Vessel Prevents Him From Being “Without Privity Or Knowledge,” A Condition Precedent To The Invocation Of The Act, Thomas C. Holcomb

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Admiralty - Torts - In Noncollision Cases Contribution Will Lie Where No Countervailing Considerations Detract From The Maritime Rule Allowing Contribution Between Joint Tortfeasors, Richard H. Siegel, Stephen O. Spinks

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Aviation Law - Insurance - Neither “War Risk” Nor Other Standard Terms Denoting Civil Disturbance Within The Exclusionary Clauses Of All Risks Policies Encompass The Destruction Of An Aircraft By Hijackers, Kathy D. Izell

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Foreign Nation Judgments - If State Law Provides For The Enforceability Of Foreign Judgments, The Judgment Is Enforceable Without Determination Of Whether The Arbitration Award On Which It Is Based Is Independently Enforceable Under The Convention On The Recognition And Enforcement Of Foreign Arbitral Awards, John W. Kindt

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Contracts - Arbitration Agreement - An Arbitration Agreement In An International Contract Is To Be Given Full Effect By Federal Courts Except Where Public Policy Or Equity Dictate Otherwise, James D. Dunham, J. S. Schuster

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Icelandic Fisheries Dispute: A Decision Is Finally Rendered, Roger A. Briney

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

International Straits: The Right Of Access, R. P. Cundick

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

United States Obligations Under Status Of Forces Agreements: A New Method Of Extradition?, William J. Norton

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: Seeking A Balance: Judicial Diversity In Ri 7/7/2016, Michael M. Bowden, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: Kuckes On Discovery Ruling 7-7-2016, Sheri Qualters, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

The Proposed Separation Of Powers Restoration Act Goes Too Far, Jack M. Beermann

Shorter Faculty Works

If passed, the Separation of Powers Restoration Act would require federal courts conducting judicial review of agency action to decide “de novo all relevant questions of law, including the interpretation of constitutional and statutory provisions and rules.” Although I have long been highly critical of Chevron, see, e.g., Jack M. Beermann, End the Failed Chevron Experiment Now: How Chevron Has Failed and Why It Can and Should be Overruled, 42 Conn. L. Rev. 9 (2010), and also have misgivings about Auer deference, I fear that the proposed Act goes too far in completely eliminating deference to agency legal determinations.

References To Television Programming In Judicial Opinions And Lawyers’ Advocacy, Douglas E. Abrams

Faculty Publications

"Think of the poor judge who is reading ... hundreds and hundreds of these briefs," says Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. "Liven their life up just a little bit. . . with something interesting." Lawyers can "liven up" their briefs with references to television shows generally known to Americans who have grown up watching the small screen. After discussing television's pervasive effect on American culture since the early 1950s, this Article surveys the array of television references that appear in federal and state judicial opinions. In cases with no claims or defenses concerning the television industry, judges often help …

Book Review: Challenges And Recusals Of Judges And Arbitrators In International Courts And Tribunals, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

The proliferation of international courts and tribunals over the last few decades has made it increasingly important to ensure that such proceedings are entirely above reproach. In particular, questions have arisen about what should be done in cases where a judge’s or arbitrator’s continued presence threatens the legitimacy of the proceedings. As fundamental as this question is, very little has been written about the standards for challenge and removal of such officials. Fortunately, Challenges and Recusals of Judges and Arbitrators in International Courts and Tribunals, a new collection of essays edited by Chiara Giorgetti, Associate Professor of Law at the …

The Two Faces Of The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Emily Berman

Indiana Law Journal

When former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden leaked a massive trove of information about secret intelligence-collection programs implemented under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in the summer of 2013, U.S. surveillance activities were thrust to the forefront of public debate. This debate included the question of whether and how to reform the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (“FISA Court”), the statutorily created secret court that reviews government applications to conduct surveillance in the United States. This discussion, however, has underemphasized a critical feature of the way the FISA Court works. As this Article will show, since the terrorist attacks of …

Courts Of Good And Ill Repute: Garoupa And Ginburg's Judicial Reputation: A Comparative Theory, Tracey E. George, G. Mitu Gulati

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Professors Garoupa and Ginsburg begin their book with an unusually valuable introduction to the substantive chapters which follow. The introduction is framed by two (in)famous examples of judicial action: one that strengthened a court’s reputation and one that damaged a court’s reputation. The book opens with Chief Justice John Roberts’s 2012 Obamacare decision (pp 1–2). Roberts not only joined the five-justice majority that upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), but also authored the Supreme Court’s opinion. Roberts’s policy preference, by any conventional measure, should have been to overturn Obamacare (p 1). Thus, he must have chosen to …

International Accountability In U.S. Law: A Call For Legislation, Jonah Diamond

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

No abstract provided.

Sovereign Immunity - The State Department’S Decision To Recognize And Allow The Claim Of Sovereign Immunity Is Binding Upon The Courts And Is Not Subject To Review Under The Administrative Procedure Act, Robin B. Gray Jr., George P. Shingler

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Right, Title And Interest In The Territorial Sea: Federal And State Claims In The United States, Stephen M. Kiser, Dan A. Aldridge Jr.

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Environmental Protection By Coastal States: The Paradigm From Marine Transport Of Petroleum, Joseph C. Sweeny

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Gatekeeping Science: Using The Structure Of Scientific Research To Distinguish Between Admissibility And Weight In Expert Testimony, David L. Faigman, Christopher Slobogin, John Monahan

Northwestern University Law Review

Fundamental to all evidence rules is the division of responsibility between the judge, who determines the admissibility of evidence, and the jury, which gauges its weight. In most evidentiary contexts, such as those involving hearsay and character, threshold admissibility obligations are clear and relatively uncontroversial. The same is not true for scientific evidence. The complex nature of scientific inference, and in particular the challenges of reasoning from group data to individual cases, has bedeviled courts. As a result, courts vary considerably on how they define the judge’s gatekeeping task under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and its state equivalents.

This …

The Scrivener’S Error, Ryan D. Doerfler

Northwestern University Law Review

It is widely accepted that courts may correct legislative drafting mistakes, i.e., so-called scrivener’s errors, if and only if such mistakes are “absolutely clear.” The rationale is that if a court were to recognize a less clear error, it might be “rewriting” the statute rather than correcting a technical mistake.

This Article argues that the standard is much too strict. The current rationale ignores that courts can “rewrite,” i.e., misinterpret, a statute both by recognizing an error and by failing to do so. Accordingly, because the current doctrine is designed to protect against one type of mistake (false positives) but …

Newsroom: Op-Ed: Yelnosky On Judicial Selection 6-17-2016, Michael J. Yelnosky, Providence Journal, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: The Guardian: Gutoff On Cook's 'Endeavour', 6-16-2016, The Guardian, Associated Press, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law - Rights Of Aliens - Citizenship As A Requirement For Admission To The Bar Is A Violation Of Equal Protection, John L. Scott

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

“Criminal Records” - A Comparative Approach, Sigmund A. Cohn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Book Review: Foreign Affairs And The Constitution. By Louis Henkin. Mineola, N.Y.: The Foundation Press, 1972. Pp. 553. $11.50., Carl Marcy

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

International Fisheries Regulation, John P. Rivers

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The International Court And South West Africa: Latest Phase, Antony J.M. Zuijdwijk

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Erdos V. United States: Expansion Of Extraterritoriality And Revival Of Exterritoriality, Gary I. Strausberg

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Imagined Identities: Defining The Racial Group In The Crime Of Genocide, Carola Lingaas

Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal

The provisions on genocide protect four exclusive, amongst others the racial, groups. Yet, international criminal tribunals are manifestly uncomfortable with collective groupings and interpret ‘race’ rather inconsistently. Nevertheless, there is a tendency to a subjective approach based upon the perpetrator’s perception of the targeted group. The victim’s membership is accordingly not determined objectively, but by the perception of differentness. This article incorporates the theory of imagined identities into law, thereby providing tribunals with a tool to define ‘race’. Its essence is that even if the group does not exist, it must be granted protection because of its perceived and thereby …