Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Legal Remedies
The Copyright Act Of 1976 And Prejudgment Interest, Jon M. Powers
The Copyright Act Of 1976 And Prejudgment Interest, Jon M. Powers
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that prejudgment interest should be presumptively available on damages-plus-profits awards under section 504(b) but should not be available for statutory damages under section 504(c). Part I argues that Supreme Court precedent suggests that the explicit reference to interest found in the Patent Act does not prevent courts from awarding prejudgment interest under the 1976 Copyright Act. Part II asserts that the 1976 Copyright Act's silence regarding prejudgment interest does not represent a congressional choice to exclude this remedy and that, in the face of this silence, the underlying purposes of section 504 should determine the propriety of …
Awarding Attorneys' Fees To Prevailing Pro Se Litigants, Michigan Law Review
Awarding Attorneys' Fees To Prevailing Pro Se Litigants, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
This Note examines- the propriety of awarding attorneys' fees to prevailing pro se litigants in the federal courts. It focuses on the four major statutes under which almost all pro se cases have been filed: the Freedom of Information Act of 1974 (FOIA), the Privacy Act of 1974 (Privacy Act), the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act of 1976 (CRAFAA), and the Truth in Lending Act (TILA). In so doing, it will attempt to devise common principles that can be applied to most requests for pro se attorneys' fees. Part I looks first to the statutes' language and legislative histories …
Sabbatino Doctrine Modified In Foreign Assistance Act Of 1964, Michigan Law Review
Sabbatino Doctrine Modified In Foreign Assistance Act Of 1964, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Prior to Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino, one of the United States Supreme Court's most controversial recent decisions touching on matters of international law, it had been held that American courts could not question titles to property acquired by virtue of a public taking decreed by a recognized foreign government and carried out within its territory. This concept of judicial abstention, embodied in the "act of state doctrine," was held applicable in Sabbatino even though it was alleged that the asserted claim to the property stemmed from a confiscation that violated customary international law. This decision led Congress …