Courts Commons^™

What Does A "Juvenile Adjudication" Mean In Minnesota? Some New Answers After A Century Of Change In Juvenile Court, John M. Stuart, Amy K. R. Zaske

William Mitchell Law Review

No abstract provided.

Introducing The Construct Of The Jury Into Family Violence Proceedings And Family Court Jurisprudence, Melissa L. Breger

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

This Article draws upon both the theory of and research on procedural justice holding that litigants often focus on the appearance of fairness rather than on the actual outcome. Thus, when litigants are able to choose the modality of fact-finding, they may be more accepting of the legal process, even if the outcome is not favorable to them. Allowing the option of a jury, even if not exercised, may dramatically improve the perceptions of litigants and may affect the legitimacy and longevity of case outcomes.

Volume 73

Tennessee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Preservation Obligation: Regulating And Sanctioning Pre-Litigation Spoliation In Federal Court, A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

The issue of discovery misconduct, specifically as it pertains to the pre-litigation duty to preserve and sanctions for spoliation, has garnered much attention in the wake of decisions by two prominent jurists whose voices carry great weight in this area. In Pension Committee of University of Montreal Pension Plan v. Bank of America Securities, Judge Shira Scheindlin - of the Zubulake e-discovery cases - penned a scholarly and thorough opinion setting forth her views regarding the triggering of the duty to preserve potentially relevant information pending litigation and the standards for determining the appropriate sanctions for various breaches of that …

Bartnicki As Lochner: Some Thoughts On First Amendment Lochnerism, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Navigating Residential Attorney Approvals: Finding A Better Judicial North Star, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 171 (2006), Debra Pogrund Stark

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Hybrid Class Action As Judicial Spork: Managing Individual Rights In A Stew Of Common Wrong, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 231 (2006), Jon Romberg

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The History Of Slave Marriage In The United States, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 299 (2006), Darlene C. Goring

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

In The Service Of Secrets: The U.S. Supreme Court Revisits Totten, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 475 (2006), Douglas Kash, Matthew Indrisano

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

"For It's One, Two, Three Strikes, You're Out . . .", 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 493 (2006), Kaycee Hopwood

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Manson V. Brathwaite: The Supreme Court's Misunderstanding Of Eyewitness Identification, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 539 (2006), Ruth Yacona

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Resolving The Judicial Paradox Of "Equitable" Relief Under Erisa Section 502(A)(3), 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 827 (2006), Colleen E. Medill

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Adjudicated On The Merits?: Why The Aedpa Requires State Courts To Exhibit Their Reasoning, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 995 (2006), Ezra Spilke

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Why Legislative Findings Can Pad-Lock Redistricting Plans In Racial-Gerrymandering Cases, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1371 (2006), Frank Adams

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dostoyevsky And The Therapeutic Jurisprudence Confession, 40 J. Marshall L. Rev. 41 (2006), Amy D. Ronner

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Second Chance For Justice: Reevaluation Of The United States Double Jeopardy Standard, 40 J. Marshall L. Rev. 371 (2006), Andrea Koklys

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Always Low Prices, Always At A Cost: A Call To Arms Against The Wal-Martization Of America, 40 J. Marshall L. Rev. 267 (2006), Justin R. Watkins

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

How Much Justice Can We Afford?: Defining The Courts' Roles And Deciding The Appropriate Number Of Trials, Settlement Signals, And Other Elements Needed To Administer Justice, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

This article discusses how the U.S. court system can function optimally given declining trial rates and the limited resources available. The question of how much justice we can afford is a challenge that becomes more difficult as budgets fall behind the increasing demand for and cost of court services. Presumably most analysts would agree that courts should try cases when appropriate - and help litigants find just resolutions without trial when it is not needed. The courts' ability to provide trials in some cases is possible only if the vast majority of other cases are not tried.This article provides background …

Revisiting Anna Moscowitz's Kross's Critique Of New York City's Women's Court: The Continued Problem Of Solving The "Problem" Of Prostitution With Specialized Criminal Courts, Mae C. Quinn

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.

Goodbye To Affidavits - Improving The Federal Affidavit Substitute Statute, Ira Shiflett

Cleveland State Law Review

Thirty years ago, Congress recognized that the costs of notarization generally outweighed the benefits. In 1976, Congress enacted 28 U.S.C. § 1746, intending to limit the circumstances in which a notary would be required. Section 1746 provides that whenever a document is required to be supported by a notarized statement other than a deposition, an oath of office, or an oath required to be taken before an official other than a notary, a declaration under penalty of perjury is a sufficient substitute. Congress recognized that it could be inconvenient to find a notary, especially on the weekends or for people …

A New Prescription For America's Medical Liability System, Paul J. Barringer Iii

Journal of Health Care Law and Policy

No abstract provided.

Reform Of Medical Liability And Patient Safety: Are Health Courts And Medicare The Keys To Effective Change?, Randall R. Bovbjerg

Journal of Health Care Law and Policy

No abstract provided.

Health Courts And Malpractice Claims Adjudication Through Medicare: Some Questions, Timothy Stoltzfus Jost

Journal of Health Care Law and Policy

No abstract provided.

An Advocate's Response To Professor Sage, Toby S. Edelman

Journal of Health Care Law and Policy

No abstract provided.

Revisiting The Tense Relationship Between The U.S. Supreme Court, Administrative Procedure, And The National Environmental Policy Act, Jason J. Czarnezki

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This Article addresses the possibility, under the prevailing understanding of NEPA, that an agency might draft a comprehensive report containing information about potential environmental effects and alternate approaches to a proposed plan--and then wholly disregard all of this information in making its final decision. Although an agency may contend that it has “considered” the environmental consequences of alternative courses of action, what if these factors have no actual impact on its final decision? Hypothetically, an agency could simply “steamroll” toward its preferred decision, hurdling NEPA's procedural obstacles without genuinely considering potential environmental harms or the means to avoid them.

This …

Exploring The Myths About The Ninth Circuit, Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

The Dilution Solution: Populating The Trademark A-List, Scott C. Wilcox

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

In our celebrity-conscious culture, the media serve as arbiters of fame. The editors of Us Weekly and People wield significant influence over public recognition of celebrities. Since the Federal Trademark Dilution Act (“FTDA”) amended the Lanham Act in 1995, federal courts have adopted similar roles as arbiters of fame, determining which trademarks are sufficiently famous to receive federal protection against dilution. Recent changes to the Lanham Act, however, reserve the availability of dilution actions to “A-list” marks. These changes fulfill the objectives of trademark law while achieving Congress’s intent in enacting the FTDA.

Stevens's Ratchet: When The Court Should Decide Not To Decide, Joel A. Flaxman

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

Hidden underneath the racy death penalty issues in Kansas v. Marsh lurks a seemingly dull procedural issue addressed only in separate opinions by Justices Stevens and Scalia: whether the Court should have heard the case in the first place. As he did in three cases from the Court’s 2005 term, Justice Stevens argued in Marsh that the Court has no legitimate interest in reviewing state court decisions that overprotect federal constitutional rights. Instead, the Supreme Court should exercise its certiorari power to tip the scales against states and in favor of individuals. Granting certiorari in Marsh, Stevens argued, was not …

The High Court Remains As Divided As Ever Over The Death Penalty, George H. Kendall

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

More than three decades ago, in Furman v. Georgia, a sharply divided Supreme Court struck down all existing capital punishment schemes be-cause the results they generated were arbitrary, discriminatory, and unreasoned. No member of that Court remains on the Court today, and the Court has grown increasingly conservative ever since. Nevertheless, impor-tant questions concerning the administration of capital punishment continue to wrought deep divisions within the Court, for instance in determining whether racial bias influences the system, in determining the sufficiency of new evidence of innocence to justify review of a defaulted claim in habeas corpus proceedings, in determining a …

The Trademark Dilution Revision Act Of 2006: A Welcome—And Needed—Change, Dale M. Cendali, Bonnie L. Schriefer

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

Some have argued that the changes to the Federal Trademark Dilution Act (the “FTDA”) embodied in the recently enacted Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006 (the “TDRA”) threaten to infringe upon the right to free speech. This is simply not the case. The FTDA has always protected First Amendment rights, and the TDRA clarifies and strengthens those protections. While the concept of dilution was introduced in 1927, there was no federal dilution law in the United States until 1995, when Congress passed the FTDA. Since then, various federal courts have reached different conclusions regarding issues such as: (1) what constituted …