Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (4)
- Torts (4)
- Dispute Resolution and Arbitration (2)
- Legal History (2)
- Litigation (2)
-
- Civil Law (1)
- Communications Law (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Energy and Utilities Law (1)
- Environmental Law (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Land Use Law (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (1)
- Medical Jurisprudence (1)
- Natural Resources Law (1)
- Property Law and Real Estate (1)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (1)
- Sexuality and the Law (1)
- State and Local Government Law (1)
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Legal Remedies
Bailouts, Bonuses, And The Return Of Unjust Gain, Tracy A. Thomas
Bailouts, Bonuses, And The Return Of Unjust Gain, Tracy A. Thomas
Akron Law Faculty Publications
In March 2009, ailing insurance giant triggered a national outcry when it paid out $165 million in government bailout funds for employee bonus incentives. President Obama called the bonus payments an “outrage” and promised that his administration would “pursue every single legal avenue to block these bonuses and make the taxpayers whole.” One possible answer lies with the remedy of restitution. Restitution, based on unjust enrichment, provides a common law solution that just might work. Unjust enrichment is a remedy directed at the defendant that requires the wrongdoer to return all ill-gotten gains. The goal is to return the defendant …
The Story Of Bivens V. Six Unknown-Named Agents Of The Federal Bureau Of Narcotics, James E. Pfander
The Story Of Bivens V. Six Unknown-Named Agents Of The Federal Bureau Of Narcotics, James E. Pfander
Faculty Working Papers
In Bivens v. Six Unknown-Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, the Supreme Court recognized the right of an individual to sue federal government officials for a violation of constitutional rights. Drawing on interviews with some of the participants, including Webster Bivens himself and one of the agents who conducted the search, this chapter in the forthcoming book Federal Courts' Stories describes the events that led to the litigation and the complex array of factors that informed the Court's approach to the case. After placing the Bivens decision in context, the chapter evaluates the competing narratives that have grown …
Federalism At The Cathedral: Property Rules, Liability Rules, And Inalienability Rules In Tenth Amendment Infrastructure, Erin Ryan
Erin Ryan
As climate change, war in the Middle East, and the price of oil focus American determination to move beyond fossil fuels, nuclear power has resurfaced as a possible alternative. But energy reform efforts may be stalled by an unlikely policy deadlock stemming from a structural technicality in an aging Supreme Court decision: New York v. United States, which set forth the Tenth Amendment anti-commandeering rule and ushered in the New Federalism era in 1992. This dry technicality also poses ongoing regulatory obstacles in such critical interjurisdictional contexts as stormwater management, climate regulation, and disaster response. Such is the enormous power …
The Tort Of Betrayal Of Trust, Caroline Forell, Anna Sortun
The Tort Of Betrayal Of Trust, Caroline Forell, Anna Sortun
Caroline A Forell
Fiduciary betrayal is a serious harm. When the fiduciary is a doctor or a lawyer, and the entrustor is a patient or client, this harm frequently goes unremedied. Betrayals arise out of disloyalty and conflicts of interest where the lawyer or doctor puts his or her interest above that of his or her client or patient. It causes dignitary harm that is different from the harm flowing from negligent malpractice. Nevertheless, courts, concerned with overdeterrence, have for the most part refused to allow a separate claim for betrayal. In this Article, we suggest that betrayal deserves a remedy and propose …
Common Law Punitive Damages: Something For Everyone?, Doug Rendleman
Common Law Punitive Damages: Something For Everyone?, Doug Rendleman
Scholarly Articles
Common law punitive damages have some feature that will get everyone's goat: a civil court meting out quasi-criminal punishment; a sanction, punishment, imposed after mere civil procedure; a civil jury stretching imprecise instructions into Robin Hood justice; a private plaintiff receiving a windfall that exceeds any reasonable estimate of loss; and, finally, the Supreme Court wielding the discredited doctrine of substantive due process. This article will examine the preceding fault lines and the countervailing considerations, devoting more attention to substantive due process than the others. It will then turn to Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, and include some modest …
Bailouts, Bonuses, And The Return Of Unjust Gain, Tracy A. Thomas
Bailouts, Bonuses, And The Return Of Unjust Gain, Tracy A. Thomas
Tracy A. Thomas
In March 2009, ailing insurance giant triggered a national outcry when it paid out $165 million in government bailout funds for employee bonus incentives. President Obama called the bonus payments an “outrage” and promised that his administration would “pursue every single legal avenue to block these bonuses and make the taxpayers whole.” One possible answer lies with the remedy of restitution. Restitution, based on unjust enrichment, provides a common law solution that just might work. Unjust enrichment is a remedy directed at the defendant that requires the wrongdoer to return all ill-gotten gains. The goal is to return the defendant …
Rethinking Bivens: Legitimacy And Constitutional Adjudication, James E. Pfander, David Baltmanis
Rethinking Bivens: Legitimacy And Constitutional Adjudication, James E. Pfander, David Baltmanis
Faculty Working Papers
The Supreme Court's decision in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics provides an uncertain framework for the enforcement of constitutional rights against the federal government. Rather than recognizing a federal common law right of action for use in every case, the Court views itself as devising actions on a case-by-case basis in light of a range of factors. Critics on all sides question the Court's approach, doubting either its power to fashion federal common law or the tendency of its case-by-case analysis to create gaps in constitutional enforcement. Particularly when compared with actions under …
The Appropriations Power And Sovereign Immunity, Paul F. Figley
The Appropriations Power And Sovereign Immunity, Paul F. Figley
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
Discussions of sovereign immunity assume that the Constitution contains no explicit text regarding sovereign immunity. As a result, arguments about the existence - or nonexistence - of sovereign immunity begin with the English and American common-law doctrines. Exploring political, fiscal, and legal developments in England and the American colonies in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, this Article shows that focusing on common-law developments is misguided. The common-law approach to sovereign immunity ended in the early 1700s. The Bankers’ Case (1690–1700), which is often regarded as the first modern common-law treatment of sovereign immunity, is in fact the last in the …
The Phases And Faces Of The Duke Lacrosse Controversy: A Conversation, Angela J. Davis, James E. Coleman Jr, Michael Gerhardt, K.C. Johnson
The Phases And Faces Of The Duke Lacrosse Controversy: A Conversation, Angela J. Davis, James E. Coleman Jr, Michael Gerhardt, K.C. Johnson
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
No abstract provided.
The Legacy Of The 9/11 Fund And The Minnesota I-35w Bridge-Collapse Fund: Creating A Template For Compensating Victims Of Future Mass-Tort Catastrophes, Michael K. Steenson
The Legacy Of The 9/11 Fund And The Minnesota I-35w Bridge-Collapse Fund: Creating A Template For Compensating Victims Of Future Mass-Tort Catastrophes, Michael K. Steenson
Faculty Scholarship
The purpose of this article is to analyze and compare the 9/11 Fund and the Minnesota bridge-collapse compensation scheme for purposes of illustrating the necessary components of any future compensation schemes legislatures consider adopting in cases involving other catastrophes. This article first sets out the primary issues that must be addressed when considering a compensation scheme. It then examines the choices made in the 9/11 Fund and Minnesota’s bridge-collapse compensation scheme. A brief comparison of the two compensation schemes follows to provide the framework for considering the components of future compensation schemes.