Judges Commons^™

A Simple Theory Of Complex Valuation, Anthony J. Casey, Julia Simon-Kerr

Michigan Law Review

Complex valuations of assets, companies, government programs, damages, and the like cannot be done without expertise, yet judges routinely pick an arbitrary value that falls somewhere between the extreme numbers suggested by competing experts. This creates costly uncertainty and undermines the legitimacy of the court. Proposals to remedy this well-recognized difficulty have become increasingly convoluted. As a result, no solution has been effectively adopted and the problem persists. This Article suggests that the valuation dilemma stems from a misconception of the inquiry involved. Courts have treated valuation as its own special type of inquiry distinct from traditional fact-finding. We show …

Courtroom To Classroom: Judicial Policymaking And Affirmative Action, Dylan Britton Saul

Political Science Honors Projects

The judicial branch, by exercising judicial review, can replace public policies with ones of their own creation. To test the hypothesis that judicial policymaking is desirable only when courts possess high capacity and necessity, I propose an original model incorporating six variables: generalism, bi-polarity, minimalism, legitimization, structural impediments, and public support. Applying the model to a comparative case study of court-sanctioned affirmative action policies in higher education and K-12 public schools, I find that a lack of structural impediments and bi-polarity limits the desirability of judicial race-based remedies in education. Courts must restrain themselves when engaging in such policymaking.

"Home Rule" Vs. "Dillon's Rule" For Washington Cities, Hugh Spitzer

Seattle University Law Review

This Article focuses on the tension between the late-nineteenth century “Dillon’s Rule” limiting city powers, and the “home rule” approach that gained traction in the early and mid-twentieth century. Washington’s constitution allows cities to exercise all the police powers possessed by the state government, so long as local regulations do not conflict with general laws. The constitution also vests charter cities with control over their form of government. But all city powers are subject to “general laws” adopted by the legislature. Further, judicial rulings on city powers to provide public services have fluctuated, ranging from decisions citing the “Dillon’s Rule” …

The Roberts Court And Penumbral Federalism, Edward Cantu

Catholic University Law Review

For several decades the Court has invoked “state dignity” to animate federalism reasoning in isolated doctrinal contexts. Recent Roberts Court decisions suggest that a focus on state dignity, prestige, status, and similar ethereal concepts—which derive from a “penumbral” reading of the Tenth Amendment—represent the budding of a different doctrinal approach to federalism generally. This article terms this new approach “penumbral federalism,” an approach less concerned with delineating state from federal regulatory turf, and more concerned with maintaining the states as viable competitors for the respect and loyalty of the citizenry.

After fleshing out what “penumbral federalism” is and its …

O'Connor's Firsts, Phyllis L. Crocker

Akron Law Review

Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor will make her mark on the Ohio court system and on the laws of Ohio in many ways. She made two significant marks her first day as Chief Justice: she was the first woman elected to the position of Chief Justice in Ohio and in her swearing-in speech she called for review of the death penalty in Ohio.1 Both were meaningful to me personally and as a citizen of Ohio. I appreciated her acknowledging her place in history and her willingness to tackle, right from the beginning of her tenure, the important topic of the death …

Chief Justice O'Connor's Juvenile Justice Jurisprudence: A Consistent Approach To Inconsistent Interests, Yvette Mcgee-Brown, Kimberly A. Jolson

Akron Law Review

Part II of this Article examines the growth of the juvenile justice system as a system apart from the adult criminal system. It reviews the goals of the juvenile court system—to treat children differently than adults, to rehabilitate, and to protect both the child and society. Part II also discusses the gradual movement to harsher sentencing of young offenders and transferring those offenders to the adult criminal justice system, as well as the subsequent exhortation of the United States Supreme Court that youth in the juvenile justice system must be afforded the protection of constitutional rights. Part III.A explains the …

City Of Norwood V. Horney - Much More Than Eminent Domain: A Forceful Affirmation Of The Independent Authority Of The Ohio Constitution And The Court's Power To Enforce It, Kathleen M. Trafford

Akron Law Review

individual’s protection under Ohio’s eminent domain law but also refines the judiciary’s approach to Ohio constitutional analysis. Part I will set forth the pre-Norwood standard of review in Ohio eminent domain law, which took an increasingly expansive approach to determining what constitutes public use out of deference to the legislature. It will outline the standard of review for eminent domain cases at the federal level following the United States Supreme Court’s holding in Kelo, which upheld the taking of private property for purely economic reasons. Finally, Part I discusses the facts and holding of Norwood, which struck down the taking …

Flexible Predictability: Stare Decisis In Ohio, Richard Garner

Akron Law Review

This Article explores the need for a doctrine permitting, but limiting, the overruling of prior precedent; Ohio’s adoption of such a rule; and whether the current standard will endure. To fully appreciate the need for a rule that permits but also limits the overruling of prior Supreme Court precedent, it is helpful to understand the historical context in which the Galatis rule developed. Section II of this Article discusses the political and ideological changes that swept the Ohio judiciary in the early 1990s with the election of two new Justices to the Ohio Supreme Court. The new Justices quickly set …

Judge Levine: A Survey Of His Most Influential Court Of Appeals Decisions - 1993-2002, Jean D'Alessandro

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: Groundbreaking Jurist To Keynote Commencement '15, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: A Closer Look At Mass Incarceration, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Can Judges Make Reliable Numeric Judgments? Distorted Damages And Skewed Sentences, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, Andrew J. Wistrich, Chris Guthrie

Indiana Law Journal

In a series of studies involving over six hundred trial judges in three countries, we demonstrate that trial judges’ civil damage awards and criminal sentences are subject to influences that make them erratic. We found that the presence of misleading numeric reference points (or “anchors”) affected judges’ decisions in a series of hypothetical cases. Specifically, judges imposed shorter sentences when assigning sentences in months rather than in years; awarded higher amounts of compensatory damages when informed of a cap on damage awards; imposed different sentences depending upon the sequence in which criminal cases were presented to them; and were influenced …

A Practical Guide To Appellate Judging, J. E. Cote

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

A Past And Future Of Judicial Elections: The Case Of Montana, Anthony Johnstone

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Can Judges Make Reliable Numeric Judgments? Distorted Damages And Skewed Sentences, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, Andrew J. Wistrich, Chris Guthrie

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In a series of studies involving over six hundred trial judges in three countries, we demonstrate that trial judges' civil damage awards and criminal sentences are subject to influences that make them erratic. We found that the presence of misleading numeric reference points (or "anchors") affected judges' decisions in a series of hypothetical cases. Specifically, judges imposed shorter sentences when assigning sentences in months rather than in years; awarded higher amounts of compensatory damages when informed of a cap on damage awards; imposed different sentences depending upon the sequence in which criminal cases were presented to them; and were influenced …

Judgment And Opportunity: Decision Assignment On The Mclachlin Court, Peter Mccormick

Dalhousie Law Journal

The workload of the Supreme Court of Canada is shared among the Court's nine members, but is this sharing equal with respect to the writing of judgments? A simple count does not provide an answer because not all cases are equally important. This paper develops an objective measure of case importance-the Legal Complexity Index-and applies it to the cases decided by the McLachlin Court. It demonstrates that judgment-delivery opportunities for significant cases have not been shared equally, either overall or with respect to any of the major subdivisions of the caseload. Some judges enjoy the spotlight, while others are relegated …

International Law And National Courts: Between Mutual Empowerment And Mutual Weakening, Osnat Grady Schwartz

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

Over the past two decades, national courts have increasingly engaged with international law in fields and cases they used to avoid before. This Article argues that national courts' voluntary/discretionary application of international law and their greater openness to it are incentivized by the power offered to courts by international law. It empowers them directly - through making them direct subjects of it, advancing the rule of law, and offering institutional backup in the form of international courts and tribunals - and indirectly - by offering them a normative tool kit to be used in their decisions and amplify their legitimacy. …

Six Overrulings, Andrew Koppelman

Michigan Law Review

John Paul Stevens, who retired in 2010 at the age of ninety after more than thirty-four years on the Supreme Court, has capped his astoundingly distinguished career by becoming an important public intellectual. He reviews books, gives high-profile interviews, wrote a memoir of the chief justices he has known, and has now written a second book. Six Amendments revisits half a dozen old, lost battles. Stevens appeals over the heads of his colleagues to a higher authority: the public. Now that he is off the Court, Stevens explains why six decisions in which he dissented should be overruled by constitutional …

High Court Pretense, Lower Court Candor: Judicial Impartiality After Caperton V. Massey Coal Co., Lynne H. Rambo

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

No abstract provided.

Judge Posner's Simple Law, Mitchell N. Berman

Michigan Law Review

The world is complex, Richard Posner observes in his most recent book, Reflections on Judging. It follows that, for judges to achieve “sensible” resolutions of real-world disputes—by which Judge Posner means “in a way that can be explained in ordinary language and justified as consistent with the expectations of normal people” (p. 354)—they must be able to navigate the world’s complexity successfully. To apply legal rules correctly and (where judicial lawmaking is called for) to formulate legal rules prudently, judges must understand the causal mechanisms and processes that undergird complex systems, and they must be able to draw sound factual …

A Past And Future Of Judicial Elections: The Case Of Montana, Anthony Johnstone

Faculty Law Review Articles

This article searches for lessons from Montana’s experience for the future of American judicial elections. Part II considers the origin of judicial elections and history of reforms in Montana, which is marked both by substantial worries about outside political intervention in state courts and by several innovative responses to it. Part III reviews the practice established by Montana’s reformed model of judicial selection over the past four decades. Part IV examines the Montana Supreme Court’s engagement with Citizens United, followed by a close analysis of an election held in its aftermath: the hardfought 2014 campaign between incumbent Justice Mike Wheat …

Lessons Unlearned: The Effects Of Statutory Ambiguity And The Interpretative Uncertainty It Injects In The Courts, Carolyn Singh

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

For centuries, courts have dealt with the challenge of imposing penalties for crimes when governing law changes. Applying the new provisions can be a straightforward exercise for courts, but when legislatures are ambiguous with regard to which law applies-forexample, to pending cases-the courts are forced to interpret what legislatures intended. For some judges, the answer is easily found in the plain meaning of the text. For others, legislative intent can become the deciding factor. Throughout United States history, this has been a manageable yet controversial task, but aside from interpretive differences among judges, creating laws with uncertainty is a dangerous …

Product Liability Law In Japan: An Introduction To A Developing Area Of Law, Younghee Jin Ottley, Bruce L. Ottley

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

When Rules Are Made To Be Broken, Zev J. Eigen, David S. Sherwyn, Nicholas F. Menillo

Northwestern University Law Review

When do judges follow rules expected to produce unjust results, and when do they intentionally misapply such rules to avoid injustice? Judicial rule-breaking is commonly observed when national dignity and morality are at stake, such as abolitionist judges charged with applying federal fugitive slave laws, or when lives hang in the balance, such as applications of criminal sentencing rules. Much less is understood about judicial rule-breaking in quotidian civil litigation, in spite of the sizeable impact on litigants and potential litigants, as well as the frequency with which judges face such decisions. This Article is the first to theoretically assess …

Is There A Place For Religion In Judicial Decision-Making?, Hon. Kermit V. Lipez

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Philip D. Reed Lecture Series: Judicial Records Forum, Panel Discussion

Fordham Law Review

    This Panel Discussion of the Judicial Records Forum was held on June 4, 2014, at Fordham University School of Law. The Judicial Records Forum focuses on issues involving the creation and management of judicial records and access to judicial records in the digital age.
    The transcript of the Panel Discussion has been lightly edited and represents the panelists’ individual views only, and in no way reflects those of their affiliated firms, organizations, law schools, or the judiciary.

Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

When Judges Have Reasons Not To Give Reasons: A Comparative Law Approach, Mathilde Cohen

Washington and Lee Law Review

Influential theories of law have celebrated judicial reason-giving as furthering a host of democratic values, including judges’ accountability, citizens’ participation in djudication, and a more accurate and transparent decision-making process. This Article has two main purposes. First, it argues that although reason-giving is important, it is often in tension with other values of the judicial process, such as guidance, sincerity, and efficiency. Reason-giving must, therefore, be balanced against these competing values. In other words, judges sometimes have reasons not to give reasons. Second, contrary to common intuition, common law and civil law systems deal with this tension between reasons for …

Issue 3: Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Friendly Amendment, Larry Yackle

Faculty Scholarship

Heather Gerken comes to praise Justice Kennedy’s opinion for the Supreme Court in United States v. Windsor. 1 I come to praise Gerken’s valiant effort to recast the Windsor opinion along more convincing lines.2 Gerken does not propose a wholesale substitute for Justice Kennedy’s analysis. She suggests a shift in emphasis that lends Kennedy’s explanation for condemning DOMA a surprising jurisprudential significance. Where some us have seen yet another lamentable paean to the sovereignty of the states, Gerken detects the faint hint of the “nationalist” school of federalism that she and others have nurtured in recent years.3 Gerken does not …