Courts Commons^™

Vladimir Putin And The Rule Of Law In Russia, Jeffrey Kahn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Foreign Precedents In The Federal Judiciary: The Case Of The World Trade Organization's Dsb Decisions, James Thuo Gathii

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

A Difficult Situation Made Harder: A Parent's Choice Between Civil Remedies And Criminal Charges In International Child Abduction, Donyale N. Leslie

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Must Treaty Violations Be Remedied?: A Critique Of Sanchez-Llamas V. Oregon, John Quigley

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

All In The Family: The Influence Of Social Networks On Dispute Processing (A Case Study Of A Developing Economy), Manuel A. Gómez

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Restrictions On Humanitarian Aid In Darfur: The Role Of The International Criminal Court, Mominah Usmani

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Jurisprudence Of Discrimination As Opposed To Simple Inequality In The International Civil Service, Brian D. Patterson

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Role Of The Judiciary In The European Union's (De)Segregation Of Roma Students, Lindsey M. Green

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Losers Always Whine About Their Test: American Nuclear Testing, International Law, And The International Court Of Justice, Ryan C. Burke

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Qualified Immunity And Statutory Interpretation, Ilan Wurman

Seattle University Law Review

Before the 1989 case of Graham v. Connor, excessive force cases were pursued under either state law or the insuperable “shocks the conscience” test of the Fourteenth Amendment. Only after Graham did excessive force cases—now under the Fourth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983—inundate the federal courts, which had by then granted far-reaching immunities to officers for their constitutional torts. As a result of federal qualified immunity doctrine, which many states have adopted for themselves, excessive force cases rarely get to trial, plaintiffs often cannot recover, and courts struggle to find principled distinctions from one qualified immunity case to the …

Inevitable Imbalance: Why Ftc V. Actavis Was Inadequate To Solve The Reverse Payment Settlement Problem And Proposing A New Amendment To The Hatch-Waxman Act, Rachel A. Lewis

Seattle University Law Review

The law regarding reverse payment settlements is anything but settled. Reverse payment settlements are settlements that occur during a patent infringement litigation in which a pharmaceutical patent holder pays a generic drug producer to not infringe on the pharmaceutical patent. Despite the recent decision by the United States Supreme Court in FTC v. Actavis, Inc., there are still unanswered questions about how the “full rule of reason” analysis will be applied to reverse payment. This Comment argues that despite the outcome in Actavis, the complex regulatory framework of the Hatch–Waxman Act will create repeated conflicts between antitrust law and patent …

Sue And Settle: Demonizing The Environmental Citizen Suit, Stephen M. Johnson

Seattle University Law Review

In the spring of 2013, industry groups and states began a concerted lobbying effort to oppose citizen enforcement of the federal environmental laws. The United States Chamber of Commerce and lobbyists for states created a catch-phrase—“sue and settle”—to demonize citizen enforcement and the federal government’s practice of settling lawsuits it is destined to lose in court. The Chamber alleged that the federal government, by settling lawsuits brought by citizens groups rather than defending them in court, was colluding with those non-governmental organizations and excluding other affected parties to reallocate the agencies’ priorities and obligations. Federal environmental laws establish a central …

Moving All-In With The World Trade Organization: Ignoring Adverse Rulings And Gambling With The Future Of The Wto, Paul Rothstein

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Due Process Rights Before Eu Agencies: The Rights Of Defense, David E. Shipley

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Better For Business, Better For Justice: Why West Virginia Needs An Intermediate Appellate Court, Stephanie Zwerner

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Solution To Michigan's Child Shackling Problem, Gabe Newland

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

Detained children routinely appear before Michigan's juvenile courts shackled with handcuffs, leg irons, and belly chains. Once security officers bring a child to court in these shackles, the child usually remains in them for her hearing or trial. In Michigan, as in many other states, no statute or court rule requires the judge to decide whether shackles are necessary. This Essay argues that Michigan should pass legislation or amend state court rules to create a presumption against shackling children. Unless a child poses a substantial risk of flight or physical danger and less restrictive alternatives to shackling will not adequately …

On Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Eighth Circuit, Brief Of Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Gregory P. Warger, V. Randy D. Shauers, Susan Crump, Bennett Gershman, Victor Gold, Paul F. Rothstein, Ben Trachtenberg

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

Petitioner asks this Court to interpret Fed. R. Evid. 606(b) as permitting statements made by jurors during deliberations to be admitted to support a motion for a new trial. The practical consequences of petitioner’s rule would be significant and problematic, not only fundamentally altering the purpose and practice of voir dire, but also providing a new, fact driven, basis for post-trial motions. These expanded proceedings would place substantial additional burdens of courts, lawyers and jurors alike. In light of existing mechanisms to ensure juror honesty and impartiality, petitioner’s rule would disrupt a well-functioning system for little to no benefit.

Shame, Angry Judges, And The Social Media Effect, Maxine D. Goodman

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mediated Postnuptial Agreements And Ancillary Matters: Surindar Singh S/O Jaswant Singh V Sita Jaswant Kaur [2014] Sgca 37, Siyuan Chen

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

When the parties in a divorce have, with the benefit of legal counsel, gone through mediation and negotiated an agreement to settle the ancillary issues of maintenance and the division of matrimonial assets, is there any reason for the court to exercise its statutorily conferred discretion to ignore such an agreement or should it seek to uphold it despite objections from one of the parties? Whereas the High Court in this case declined to follow all of the terms in the agreement on the ground that some of them were not just and equitable, the Court of Appeal held that …

Putting The Microscope On Crime Labs: The Effects Of Evidence Complexity And Laboratory Type On Jurors' Perceptions Of Forensic Evidence, Miliaikeala S.J. Heen

UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones

An experiment was conducted to test the effects of evidence complexity and laboratory type on jurors' perceptions of forensic evidence. The study specifically focused on three types of labs: public labs, private labs, and "corporate labs." Public labs are managed by a federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, where evidence is usually analyzed internally at an agency. Private labs are those that have been formed as private businesses to provide services to federal, state, and local crime labs with overflow work. Corporate labs are managed by major retail corporations, and primarily service the needs of their store businesses, but …

Trial And Settlement: A Study Of High-Low Agreements, J. J. Prescott, Kathryn E. Spier, Albert Yoon

Articles

This article presents the first systematic theoretical and empirical study of highlow agreements in civil litigation. A high-low agreement is a private contract that, if signed by litigants before trial, constrains any plaintiff’s recovery to a specified range. In our theoretical model, trial is both costly and risky. When litigants have divergent subjective beliefs and are mutually optimistic about their trial prospects, cases may fail to settle. In these cases, high-low agreements can be in litigants’ mutual interest because they limit the risk of outlier awards while still allowing mutually beneficial speculation. Using claims data from a national insurance company, …

Reducing Court-Related Stress Through Court Education: Examining Child Witnesses, Attorneys And Parents, Brittnie Turquoise Watkins

UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones

Court education presents a useful approach to addressing children's stress, anxiety or fear related to testifying. The current study uses a pretest-posttest design to evaluate whether Kids' Court School (KCS), a court education program in Clark County, Nevada, reduces court-related stress in child witnesses. In addition, attorneys' and parents' concerns related to various elements of the child's impending testimony, are evaluated. The measure used to assess stress was the Court-Related Stress Scale (CRSS), a 10-item Likert scale adapted from the Stressfulness of Life Scale. In addition, open-ended questions were posed at the time of posttest. The CRSS was administered to …

Allison Orr Larsen On Intensely Empirical Amicus Briefs And Amicus Opportunism At The Supreme Court, Allison Orr Larsen

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Appellees’ Reply Brief, Attorneys For Defendants

Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality

Fighting Arizona's Attack on Ethnic Studies - Maya Arce, et al. v. John Huppenthal, et. al

Judgment Day For Fraud-On-The-Market: Reflections On Amgen And The Second Coming Of Halliburton, Donald C. Langevoort

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed the "fraud on the market" presumption of reliance, facilitating large scale class actions for this kind of securities fraud. This essay traces the road from its decision last year in Amgen to this year's reaffirmation in Halliburton II, and considers some of the issues that will emerge as lower courts struggle with Halliburton II's secondary holding--that the issue of "price impact" is crucial to class certification, even if the burden of proof is on the defendants.

A Failure To Supervise: How The Bureaucracy And The Courts Abandoned Their Intended Roles Under Erisa, Lauren R. Roth

Pace Law Review

This Article addresses how courts failed to adequately supervise employers administering pension plans before ERISA. Relying on a number of different legal theories—from an initial theory that pensions were gratuities offered by employers to the recognition that pension promises could create contractual rights—the courts repeatedly found ways to allow employers to promise much and provide little to workers expecting retirement security. In Section III, this Article addresses how Congress failed to create an effective structure for strong bureaucratic enforcement and the bureaucratic agencies with enforcement responsibilities failed to fulfill those functions. Finally, in Section IV, this Article discusses how the …

Open Chambers: Demystifying The Inner Workings And Culture Of The Georgia Court Of Appeals, Stephen Louis A. Dillard

Mercer Law Review

I vividly remember the day I learned of my appointment to the Georgia Court of Appeals. I was sitting in my cluttered but comfortable office, preparing for what would ultimately be my last hearing as a lawyer, when the phone rang. On the other end of the line was Governor Sonny Perdue's executive assistant: "Mr. Dillard, do you have time to speak with the governor?" I did, of course. And less than two weeks after that brief but life-changing conversation with Governor Perdue, I was one of Georgia's two newly appointed appellate judges (and the seventy-third judge to serve on …

The Quixotic Search For Race-Neutral Alternatives, Michael E. Rosman

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The Supreme Court has stated that the narrow-tailoring inquiry of the Equal Protection Clause’s strict scrutiny analysis of racially disparate treatment by state actors requires courts to consider whether the defendant seriously considered race-neutral alternatives before adopting the race-conscious program at issue. This article briefly examines what that means in the context of race-conscious admissions programs at colleges and universities. Part I sets forth the basic concepts that the Supreme Court uses to analyze race-conscious decision-making by governmental actors and describes the role of “race-neutral alternatives” in that scheme. Part II examines the nature of “race-neutral alternatives” and identifies its …

Screening Out Innovation: The Merits Of Meritless Litigation, Alexander A. Reinert

Indiana Law Journal

Courts and legislatures often conflate meritless and frivolous cases when balancing the desire to keep courthouse doors open to novel or unlikely claims against the concern that entertaining ultimately unsuccessful litigation will prove too costly for courts and defendants. Recently, significant procedural and substantive barriers to civil litigation have been informed by judicial and legislative assumptions about the costs of entertaining meritless and frivolous litigation. The prevailing wisdom is that eliminating meritless and frivolous claims as early in a case’s trajectory as possible will focus scarce resources on the truly meritorious cases, thereby ensuring that available remedies are properly distributed …

Brief For Eighteen Criminal Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Steffen N. Johnson, Andrew C. Nichols, Eric M. Goldstein, Eric T. Werlinger, Richard W. Garnett, Stephen F. Smith

Court Briefs

No. 13-7451
John L. Yates v. United States of America

On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

The modern federal criminal code is vast and unwieldy: some 4,500 laws criminalize conduct ranging from stockpiling biological weapons (18 U.S.C. § 175) to falsely representing oneself as a 4-H Club representative (id. § 916). Moreover, a host of these laws are redundant. Indeed, some federal crimes—notably fraud and false statements—are independently prohibited by over two hundred different statutes. Combined with over 300,000 federal criminal regulations, the canon …