Courts Commons^™

The Personal Record Book Of Hayyim Gundersheim Dayyan (1774), Edward Fram

Early Modern Workshop: Resources in Jewish History

Rabbinic courts were and remain an integral part of the Jewish community and the Jewish community in Frankfurt in the late eighteenth century had not one but two such courts. The courts handled a wide range of issues including divorces, contracts, real estate transactions, trusts, estates, and also gave opinions on the scope of Jewish communal authority. This particular case deals with a house on the so called "Judengasse" in Frankfurt. The Jewish ghetto was divided up into lots that had names rather than street numbers and houses on the lots were often owned by more than one family. The …

Proceedings Of Old Bailey (18th Century), Todd Endelman

Early Modern Workshop: Resources in Jewish History

Todd Endelman discusses the following six texts were published in The Whole Proceedings upon the King's Commission of Oyer and Terminer and Gaol Delivery for the City of London and also the Gaol Delivery for the County of Middlesex, a series of printed volumes recording cases tried at the Old Bailey in the City of London in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries (now accessible on line at www.oldbaileyonline.org.)

This presentation is for the following text(s):

• The Proceedings of the Old Bailey

Click here for the video

Rhetorical Holy War: Polygamy, Homosexuality, And The Paradox Of Community And Autonomy, Gregory C. Pingree

ExpressO

The article explores the rhetorical strategies deployed in both legal and cultural narratives of Mormon polygamy in nineteenth-century America. It demonstrates how an understanding of that unique communal experience, and the narratives by which it was represented, informs the classic paradox of community and autonomy – the tension between the collective and the individual. The article concludes by using the Mormon polygamy analysis to illuminate a contemporary social situation that underscores the paradox of community and autonomy – homosexuality and the so-called culture wars over family values and the meaning of marriage.

U.S. Supreme Court Tort Reform: Limiting State Power To Articulate And Develop Its Own Tort Law–Defamation, Preemption, And Punitive Damages, Thomas C. Galligan

ExpressO

U.S. Supreme Court Tort Reform: Limiting State Power to Articulate and Develop Its Own Tort Law–Defamation, Preemption, and Punitive Damages analyzes and critiques the three primary areas in which the U.S. Supreme Court has found federal constitutional limits on a state’s power to articulate, develop, and apply its common law of torts. It is the first piece to consider all three areas together as an emerging body of jurisprudence which Professor Galligan calls U.S. Supreme Court tort reform. After setting forth a modest model of adjudication, the article applies that model to each of the three areas: defamation and related …

Use Of Wto Decisions In Judicial Review Of Adminstrative Action Under U.S. Antidumping Law, Dan Nichols

Brigham Young University International Law & Management Review

No abstract provided.

Shifts In Policy And Power: Calculating The Consequences Of Increased Prosecutorial Power And Reduced Judicial Authority In Post 9/11 America, Chris Mcneil

ExpressO

Among many responses to the attacks of September 11, 2001, Congress and the states have shifted to the executive branch certain powers once held by the judicial branch. This article considers the impact of transferring judicial powers to prosecutorial officers, and compares the consequent increased powers of the prosecutor with those powers traditionally held by prosecutors in Japanese criminal courts. It considers the impact of removing from public view and judicial oversight many prosecutorial functions, drawing comparisons between the largely opaque Japanese prosecutorial roles and those roles now assumed in immigration and anti-terrorism laws, noting the need for safeguards not …

Counter-Majoritarian Power And Judges' Political Speech, Michael R. Dimino

ExpressO

Canons of ethics restrict judicial campaigning and prohibit sitting judges from engaging in political activity. Only recently, in Republican Party v. White, 536 U.S. 765 (2002), has the Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of these restrictions, concluding that judicial candidates must be allowed some opportunity to discuss legal and political issues in their campaigns. But White left many questions unanswered about the permissible scope of restrictions on judges’ political activity.

This Article suggests that those questions will be answered not by applying principles of free speech, but by analyzing the opportunities the restrictions provide for independent judicial policy-making. Restrictions on …

High-Tech Trial Lawyers And The Court: Responsibilities, Problems, And Opportunities, Fredric I. Lederer

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Word Games: Raising And Resolving The Shortcomings In Accident-Insurance Doctrine That Autoerotic-Asphyxiation Cases Reveal, Sam Erman

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that autoerotic asphyxiation deaths are accidents and not the results of intentionally self-inflicted injuries. Part I formally analyzes accident-insurance case law to show that current, viable approaches to accident insurance indicate that autoerotic asphyxiation deaths are accidental. Part II claims autoerotic asphyxiation deaths should not trigger intentionally self-inflicted injury exclusion clauses because the practice does not intentionally injure. This Note concludes beneficiaries should recover when accident-insurance policyholders die during autoerotic asphyxiation.

House Resolution On The Appropriate Role Of Foreign Judgments In The Interpretation Of The Constitution Of The United States: Hearing Before The Subcommittee On The Constitution, House Committee On The Judiciary, 109th Cong., July 19, 2005 (Statement Of Viet D. Dinh, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Viet D. Dinh

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

House Resolution On The Appropriate Role Of Foreign Judgements In The Interpretation Of The Constitution Of The United States: Hearing Before The Subcomm. On The Constitution, H. Comm. On The Judiciary, 109th Cong., July 19, 2005 (Statement Of Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

From International Law To Law And Globalization, Paul Schiff Berman

ExpressO

International law’s traditional emphasis on state practice has long been questioned, as scholars have paid increasing attention to other important – though sometimes inchoate – processes of international norm development. Yet, the more recent focus on transnational law, governmental and non-governmental networks, and judicial influence and cooperation across borders, while a step in the right direction, still seems insufficient to describe the complexities of law in an era of globalization. Accordingly, it is becoming clear that “international law” is itself an overly constraining rubric and that we need an expanded framework, one that situates cross-border norm development at the intersection …

Back To Government?: The Pluralistic Deficit In The Decisionmaking Process And Before The Courts, Fulvio Cortese, Marco Dani, Francesco Palermo

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Back to Government?: The Pluralistic Deficit in the Decisionmaking Processes and Before the Courts, Symposium. University of Trento, Italy, June 11-12, 2004.

Access To U.S. Federal Courts As A Forum For Human Rights Disputes: Pluralism And The Alien Tort Claims Act, Christiana Ochoa

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Back to Government?: The Pluralistic Deficit in the Decisionmaking Processes and Before the Courts, Symposium. University of Trento, Italy, June 11-12, 2004.

Taking Legal Pluralism Seriously: The Alien Tort Claims Act And The Role Of International Law Before U.S. Federal Courts, Luisa Antoniolli

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Back to Government?: The Pluralistic Deficit in the Decisionmaking Processes and Before the Courts, Symposium. University of Trento, Italy, June 11-12, 2004.

Pluralistic Deficit And Direct Claims To European Constitutional Courts, Serena Baldin

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Back to Government?: The Pluralistic Deficit in the Decisionmaking Processes and Before the Courts, Symposium. University of Trento, Italy, June 11-12, 2004.

Pleadings In The Age Of Settlement, Michael Moffitt

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Functional Representation Of The Individual's Interests Before The Ec Courts: The Evolution Of The Remedies System And The Pluralistic Deficit In The Ec, Luigi Mmalferrari

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Back to Government?: The Pluralistic Deficit in the Decisionmaking Processes and Before the Courts, Symposium. University of Trento, Italy, June 11-12, 2004.

Bayes' Law, Sequential Uncertainties, And Evidence Of Causation In Toxic Tort Cases, Neal C. Stout, Peter A. Valberg

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Judges are the gatekeepers of evidence. Arguably, the most difficult duty for a judicial gatekeeper is to screen the reliability of expert opinions in scientific fields such as medicine that are beyond the ken of most judges. Yet, judges have a duty to scrutinize such expert opinion evidence to determine its reliability and admissibility. In toxic tort cases, the issue of causation-whether the alleged exposures actually caused the plaintiffs injury-is nearly always the central dispute, and determining admissibility of expert causation opinion is a daunting challenge for most judges. We present a comprehensive review of the courts' struggles with the …

Foreign Law And The U.S. Constitution, Kenneth Anderson

Popular Media

The use of foreign law and unratified international treaty law by U.S. courts in U.S. constitutional adjudication has emerged as a major debate among justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, with Justice Anthony Kennedy writing for a majority approving the practice in the March 2005 decision of Roper v. Simmons, and Justices Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer undertaking an unusual public discussion of the practice in January 2005 at American University law school. This article examines the arguments made by Justices Kennedy, Scalia, and Breyer for and against the practice, setting them in the broader context of constitutional theory. It …

Jury Sentencing In Non-Capital Cases: Comparing Severity And Variance With Judicial Sentences In Two States, Nancy J. King, Rosevelt L. Noble

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Recently, commentators have championed sentencing byjury as more democratic and better suited to current theories of punishment than sentencing by judge alone. Yet discussions of noncapitaljury sentencing either fail to address empirical questions or rely on outdated and incomplete studies. This study is the first to present basic information on the comparative severity and variance of jury and judge sentencing as practiced in the 21st century. We use archival sentencing data from two of the six states that authorize jury sentencing-Arkansas and Virginia. In both states, voluntary sentencing guidelines govern judicial sentencing after bench trial or guilty plea, but juries …

An Honest Approach To Plea Bargaining, Steven P. Grossman

All Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, the author argues that differential sentencing of criminal defendants who plead guilty and those who go to trial is, primarily, a punishment for the defendant exercising the right to trial. The proposed solution requires an analysis of the differential sentencing motivation in light of the benefit to society and the drawbacks inherent in the plea bargaining system.

Supreme Court Overview, October Term 2004, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute, Kelly Falls

Supreme Court Overviews

No abstract provided.

Preventing The Subversion Of Devlin V. Scardelletti, Brian Wolfman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Devlin v. Scardelletti that objecting class members could appeal a federal district court’s approval of a class settlement without first intervening in the litigation. Public interest lawyer Brian Wolfman says the ruling was a victory for both objectors and the integrity of class action procedure: Objectors, he argues, help keep fairness hearings fair.

But a number of courts are now ruling that Devlin only applies to non-opt-out class actions, rather than the much more numerous ones that give class members opt-out rights. In this article, Wolfman details the exact wording of the …

Dickerson V. United States: The Case That Disappointed Miranda's Critics--And Then Its Supporters, Yale Kamisar

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

It is difficult, if not impossible, to discuss Dickerson v. United States intelligently without discussing Miranda, whose constitutional status Dickerson reaffirmed (or, one might say, resuscitated). It is also difficult, if not impossible, to discuss the Dickerson case intelligently without discussing cases the Court has handed down in the five years since Dickerson was decided. The hard truth is that in those five years the reaffirmation of Miranda’s constitutional status has become less and less meaningful.

In this paper I want to focus on the Court’s characterization of statements elicited in violation of the Miranda warnings as not actually “coerced” …

Lochner: Another Time, Another Place, Larry Yackle

Faculty Scholarship

Professor Lynn Baker's contribution to this symposium extends her long term project both to defend and to critique the Supreme Court's decisions on the scope of congressional power. I find this work valuable and not a little provocative. If Baker's account of the decisions thus far is even partly right, the Court is poised to assume decision-making responsibility that has long been ceded to Congress. If her proposals for the future are adopted, we are in for a cataclysmic constitutional event that rivals the convulsive period when the nation confronted the judicial arrogation of authority associated (rightly or wrongly) with …

Trial Trends And Implications For The Civil Justice System, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Robert C. Lafountain, Shauna Strickland

Faculty Publications

Bench and jury trials have been declining steadily for the past twenty years, both in absolute numbers and as a proportion of civil dispositions. This “vanishing trial” phenomenon was long suspected by many within the state court system, but has only recently been empirically confirmed. This issue of Caseload Highlights focuses on trends in civil trial characteristics and discusses possible causes of these trends and their implications for practitioners and policy-makers in state courts.

This abstract has been taken from the body of the report.

Subdivisions, Standing And The Supremacy Clause: Can A Political Subdivision Sue Its Parent State Under Federal Law, Brian P. Keenan

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that political subdivisions should be able to seek protection from their parent states under the Supremacy Clause when alleging a conflict between state law and any federal law, be it the Constitution, treaty, or a federal statute. Part I argues that the precedential cases like Hunter and Trenton were limited to the constitutional provisions in question and therefore did not bar all suits under the Supremacy Clause. Part II shows that the issue is one of constitutional protection of political subdivisions, rather than Article III standing, which had a completely different meaning when Hunter and Trenton were …

Judicial Citation To Legislative History: Contextual Theory And Empirical Analysis, Michael B. Abramowicz, Emerson H. Tiller

Law and Economics Papers

Judge Leventhal famously described the invocation of legislative history as "the equivalent of entering a crowded cocktail party and looking over the heads of the guests for one's friends." The volume of legislative history is so great and varied, some contend, that judges cite it selectively to advance their policy agendas. In this article, we employ positive political and contextual theories of judicial behavior to examine how judges use legislative history. We consider whether opinion-writing judges, as Judge Leventhal might suggest, cite legislative history from legislators who share the same political-ideological perspective as the opinion-writing judge? Or do judges make …

How Panels Affect Judges: Evidence From United States District Courts, Ahmed E. Taha

University of Richmond Law Review

Recent research has shown that judges on panels decide cases differently than they do individually. Understanding these panel effects is essential to understanding and predicting judicial behavior. This Article uses a unique naturalexperiment, and interviewsof United States district court judges who participatedin this ex-periment, to empirically investigate panel effects. Specifically, in fourteen district courts the judges chose to sit in an en banc panelto decide the constitutionalityof the FederalSentencing Guide- lines; in fifty-three other districts, the judges decided the issue in- dividually instead. This Article compares the decisions and the characteristicsof these districts to study how panels affect judicialdecision making …