Jurisdiction Commons^™

Exclusive Original Jurisdiction Of The United States Supreme Court: Does It Still Exist?, Julie Vick Stevenson

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Scope Of The All Writs Power, Robert T. Mann

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Case Digest, Journal Staff

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Article III of the United States Constitution does not Grant Congress the Power to Extend United States Courts' Jurisdiction over Suits by Foreign Plaintiffs against Foreign Defendants

====================

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(B), the Courts have the Power to Impose Sanction of Personal Jurisdiction when a Party Fails to Comply with Discovery Order

====================

Foreign Sovereign Immunity--A Strict Construction of the Concept of Instrumentalities under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act

Congress And The Supreme Court's Jurisdiction, Charles E. Rice

Journal Articles

When a ruling of the supreme court meets with Congressional disfavor there are several remedies available to Congress. If the decision is not on a constitutional level, a later statutory enactment will suffice to reverse or modify the ruling. If, however, the Court's decision is an interpretation of a constitutional mandate, such as the requirement of the fourteenth amendment that legislative districts be apportioned according to population, then a statute could not reverse the decision because the statute itself would be subject to that constitutional mandate as defined by the Court.

The obvious method of reversing a Supreme Court interpretation …

Federal Recent Developments

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

Coast Guard Boardings Of Suspected Drug Smuggling Vessels On The High Seas And The Fourth Amendment: United States V. Streifel, Roger A. Stetter

Cardozo Law Review

Report and Recommendation to the New York State Bar Association by the Committee on Federal Constitution

Legitimate Interests In Multistate Problems: As Between State And Federal Law, Lea Brilmayer

Michigan Law Review

This Article examines that common ground, analyzing the roles of state policy interests and contacts in defining constitutional limits. It concentrates particularly on one paradoxical aspect of the interaction between federal and state law. While the scope of constitutional limits on application of forum law is necessarily a federal issue, constitutional analysis simultaneously defers in some unspecified way to state policy. This is because federal choice-of-law questions frequently tum on the existence of a state policy interest that legitimizes the application of state law. The resulting interdependence of the federal and state issues would seemingly empower state legislatures and courts …

Toward Procedural Parity In Constitutional Litigation, Burt Neuborne

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The State Courts And Federal Constitutional Litigation, Paul M. Bator

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Surface Mining Control And Reclamation Act Of 1977, Hamlet J. Barry, Iii

Federal Lands, Laws and Policies and the Development of Natural Resources: A Short Course (Summer Conference, July 28-August 1)

48 pages.

Includes footnotes (pages 44 to 47).

The Mineral Leasing Act Of 1920, Patrick H. Martin

Federal Lands, Laws and Policies and the Development of Natural Resources: A Short Course (Summer Conference, July 28-August 1)

39 pages (includes sample forms).

Pages M-26; M-36; M-38; and M-40 do not contain pagination or content, and were not scanned.

Contains references (page M-1).

The Resource Conservation And Recovery Act And Mineral Development, Robert E. Hamel

Federal Lands, Laws and Policies and the Development of Natural Resources: A Short Course (Summer Conference, July 28-August 1)

30 pages.

The Clean Air Act And Mineral Development, Paul D. Phillips

Federal Lands, Laws and Policies and the Development of Natural Resources: A Short Course (Summer Conference, July 28-August 1)

16 pages (includes charts, maps, and illustrations).

Contains 3 pages of references.

Agenda: Federal Lands, Laws And Policies And The Development Of Natural Resources: A Short Course, University Of Colorado. School Of Law, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center

Federal Lands, Laws and Policies and the Development of Natural Resources: A Short Course (Summer Conference, July 28-August 1)

Even before the [Natural Resources Law] Center was established [in the fall of 1981], the [University of Colorado] School of Law was organizing annual natural resources law summer short courses. To date four programs have been presented:

- July 1980: "Federal Lands, Laws and Policies and the Development of Natural Resources"

- June 1981: "Water Resources Allocation: Laws and Emerging Issues"

- June 1982: "New Sources of Water for Energy Development and Growth: lnterbasin Transfers"

- June 1983: "Groundwater: Allocation, Development and Pollution"

(Reprinted from Resource Law Notes, no. 1, Jan. 1984, at 1.)

Instructors for this conference included University …

The Jurisdictional Scheme On The Public Lands, David E. Engdahl

Federal Lands, Laws and Policies and the Development of Natural Resources: A Short Course (Summer Conference, July 28-August 1)

7 pages.

After "Life For Erie--A Reply, Peter Westen

Michigan Law Review

Erie, having "preoccupied the intellectually dominant group of academic lawyers rising to maturity during the 1940's and 1950's," is reported to be losing its "symbolic centrality" for the newest generation of legal scholars. Professor Redish's prompt and excited response to our essay proves one thing: there is at least one scholar in the country who, having come to legal maturity during the last decade, still remains capable of becoming impassioned about Erie RR v. Tompkins.

Continuing The Erie Debate: A Response To Westen And Lehman, Martin H. Redish

Michigan Law Review

Although the Supreme Court has not spoken in detail on the Erie doctrine since its much-discussed decision in Hanna v. Plumer in 1965, commentary on the doctrine in the literature has undergone something of a "boomlet" in the last several years. Much of it has been stimulated by the groundbreaking article by Professor John Hart Ely in 1974. The latest contribution to the area is the recent article by Professor Peter Westen and Mr. Jeffrey Lehman appearing earlier this year in this journal. Unfortunately, their article does little to advance analysis of the Erie question, and contains numerous fundamental misstatements …

Is There Life For Erie After The Death Of Diversity?, Peter Westen, Jeffrey S. Lehman

Michigan Law Review

This Article is essentially an elaboration of these three themes. Section I sets forth the fundamental principles, or "axioms," that determine whether a particular federal rule is pertinent and valid. Once these axioms are understood, it should become apparent that Erie problems, if not easy, are not uniquely difficult either; instead, they are the kinds of "ordinary" problems that are commonplace in other areas of law. Section II applies these axioms to cases in diversity to determine the validity of various kinds of federal rules of decision. Section III examines the validity of federal rules of decision in federal question …

The Public Trust Doctrine In Public Land Law, Charles F. Wilkinson

Publications

No abstract provided.

Is There Life For Erie After The Death Of Diversity?, Peter Westen, Jeffrey S. Lehman

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Field Of Public Land Law: Some Connecting Threads And Future Directions, Charles F. Wilkinson

Publications

No abstract provided.

Log-Rolling And Judicial Review, Michael J. Waggoner

Publications

No abstract provided.

Recent Developments

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

Nathaniel Goldstein Memorial Lecture, Murray I. Gurfein

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Proposed Citizens Right To Standing Act-Finding The Keys To Unlock The Courthouse Doors, Harold W. Wood, Jr.

Seattle University Law Review

Recent Supreme Court decisions severely restrict the right of citizens to litigate in federal courts. The Court's standing requirements not only limit the ability of citizens to successfully invoke federal court jurisdiction, but also confuse lower courts and litigants attempting to apply the requirements. Standing requirements have met with increasing criticism. And Congress is now considering legislative modification of standing doctrine. Unfortunately, the Court's employment of constitutional foundations in establishing current standing requirements imposes substantial roadblocks Congress must avoid to enact remedial standing legislation. This comment examines the constitutional and pragmatic difficulties of statutory modification of standing requirements and recommends …

Free Press-Fair Trial: Restrictive Orders After Nebraska Press, Doug Rendleman

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Comparative Negligence Versus The Constitutional Guarantee Of Equal Protection: A Hypothetical Judicial Decision, Daniel O. Conkle, Claude R. Sowle

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

State Medical Malpractice Screening Panels In Federal Diversity Actions, Vincent C. Alexander

Faculty Publications

During the early 1970's, a medical malpractice crisis was perceived in the United States. An increasing number of costly and time-consuming lawsuits alleging medical malpractice against doctors, hospitals, and other health care providers caused malpractice insurers to raise premiums substantially, which in turn threatened to curtail the availability of adequate health care at reasonable cost. State legislatures responded to the crisis with a variety of substantive and procedural measures intended to reduce the number of litigated claims and the size of jury awards. One of the principal steps taken in a majority of states was the creation of extrajudicial panels …

Federal Courts - 42 U.S.C. 1983 - Suing Municipalities Under 42 U.S.C. 1983: The Impact Of Monell V. Department Of Social Services, Howard M. Klein

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Procedural Due Process In Quasi In Rem Actions After Shaffer V. Heitner, Karen Nelson Moore

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.