Litigation Commons^™

Boggs V. Boggs: Creating Real-Life Cinderellas, 33 J. Marshall L. Rev. 271 (1999), Heather J. Rose

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

When To Hear The Hearsay: A Proposal For A New Rule Of Evidence Designed To Protect The Constitutional Right Of The Criminally Accused To Confront The Witnesses Against Her, 32 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1287 (1999), Scott A. Smith

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Right To Inspect And Test Breath Alcohol Machines: Suspicion Ain't Proof, 33 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (1999), Gil Sapir, Mark Giangrande

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

State Immunity Waivers For Suits By The United States, Evan H. Caminker

Articles

The Supreme Court closed this millennium with a virtual celebration of state sovereignty, protecting state authority from the reach of congressional power in several significant ways. In a pair of cases, Seminole Tribe v. Florida1 and Alden v. Maine,2 the Court held that states enjoy a constitutional immunity from being sued without their consent. In Seminole Tribe, the Court opined that "the background principle of state sovereign immunity embodied in the Eleventh Amendment"3 protects states from unconsented suits in federal court. In Alden, the Court held that this principle is not merely embodied in the Eleventh Amendment but rather is …

Supreme Court Section 1983 Developments: October 1998 Term, Martin A. Schwartz

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Beyond The Hero Judge: Institutional Reform Litigation As Litigation, Margo Schlanger

Reviews

In 1955, in its second decision in Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court suggested that federal courts might be called upon to engage in long-term oversight of once-segregated schools. Through the 1960s, southern resistance pushed federal district and appellate judges to turn that possibility into a reality. The impact of this saga on litigation practice extended beyond school desegregation, and even beyond the struggle for African-American equality; through implementation of Brown, the nation’s litigants, lawyers, and judges grew accustomed both to issuance of permanent injunctions against state and local public institutions, and to extended court oversight of compliance. …

Supreme Court Section 1983 Developments, Martin A. Schwartz

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Taking Fiction Seriously: The Strange Results Of Public Officials' Individual Liability Under Bivens, Cornelia T. Pillard

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article argues that the Supreme Court's decision to place liability on federal officials in their personal capacity--what Professors Fallon and Meltzer call Bivens's "genius"--is in fact its Achilles' heel. Individual liability under Bivens has become fictional because it is the government, and not the individual personally, that is in fact liable in Bivens cases. The individual liability fiction has ended up helping the federal government more than the Bivens plaintiff in various ways, and has contributed to the low rate of recovery under Bivens.

It may seem odd to attribute the low rate of Bivens recoveries to the individual …

Section 1983 Litigation – Supreme Court Developments, Martin A. Schwartz

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Night And Day: Coeur D’Alene, Breard, And The Unraveling Of The Prospective-Retrospective Distinction In Eleventh Amendment Doctrine, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Supreme Court's decision in Edelman v. Jordan has been read to establish a distinction between suits seeking prospective relief from a state official's violation of federal law (which are not barred by the Eleventh Amendment under Ex parte Young) and suits seeking retrospective relief from the state (which are barred by the Eleventh Amendment, even if the officer is the defendant). Commentators and the lower courts have long had difficulty understanding and applying the distinction. Until recently, the principal effect of the Edelman line of cases has been to bar suits seeking damages and similar monetary relief from …

Independent Counsel And Vigorous Investigation And Prosecution, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This essay draws on the examples of Watergate and Iran-Contra to offer a new perspective on Independent Counsel and their ability to investigate and prosecute high-level wrongdoing. The current consensus is that an Independent Counsel, appointed by judges of the special court pursuant to the Ethics in Government Act, will invariably investigate and prosecute crimes more vigorously than a Special Prosecutor appointed by the President or the Attorney General. Watergate and Iran-Contra suggest, however, that there are institutional and political factors that make analysis of the comparative tendencies of the two types of prosecutors more complex and dependent on circumstance. …

Section 1983 Litigation, Martin A. Schwartz, Honorable George C. Pratt

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Section 1983 Litigation, Martin A. Schwartz, George C. Pratt

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Claims For Damages For Violations Of State Constitutional Rights – Analysis Of The Recent Court Of Appeals Decision In Brown V. New York; The Resolved And Unresolved Issues, Martin A. Schwartz

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Publicity In High Profile Criminal Cases, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Persistent Vegetative State: A View Across The Legal Divide, H. Richard Beresford

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Praise for Fred Plum can take many forms: for pedagogical dynamism, for depth and breadth of contributions to neurology and neuroscience, for sure-handed guidance of a department that has infused neurology with today’s and tomorrow’s leaders, and for a truly uncanny ability to fan a drive to excel in those he has touched. Mindful of his admonition to be substantive in what one says and does, my praise will embody a few reflections on the enduring legal and social impact of the “point of view” he and Bryan Jennett authored for the journal Lancet in 1972.

Race-Based Jury Nullification: Rebuttal (Part A), 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 923 (1997), Andrew D. Leipold

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Understanding The Establishment Clause: The Perspective Of Constitutional Litigation, Robert A. Sedler

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

No More Excuses: Closing The Door On The Voluntary Intoxication Defense, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 535 (1997), Chad J. Layton

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Intruders At The Death House: Limiting Third-Party Intervention In Executive Clemency, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 567 (1997), Daryl M. Schumacher

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Race-Based Jury Nullification: Case-In-Chief, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 911 (1997), Paul D. Butler

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Analysis Of People, For Michigan Republic, Ex Rel V. State Of Michigan, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 937 (1997), Phillip A. Hendges

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

This Is Who Will Die When Doctors Are Allowed To Kill Their Patients, 31 J. Marshall L. Rev. 95 (1997), Michael Mcgonnigal

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

United States, Puerto Rico, And The Territorial Incorporation Doctrine: Reaching A Century Of Constitutional Authoritarianism, 31 J. Marshall L. Rev. 55 (1997), Gabriel A. Terrasa

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Public Justice: Toward A State Action Theory Of Alterative Dispute Resolution, Richard C. Reuben

Faculty Publications

Various forms of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) are increasingly taking the place of litigation to resolve disagreements among parties. ADR is frequently imposed by court rule or legislative command for certain types of cases, or compelled by courts when private parties contract to use ADR. To date, ADR doctrine has focused on the structural issues attendant to bringing these processes into the mainstream of American dispute resolution. This Article contends that courts must now address the question of whether ADR-both court-related and contractual-can constitute state action, and therefore be subject to constitutional restraints. The author surveys the history and modern …

Post-Verdict Interviews: The Key To Understanding The Decision Behind The Verdict, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 507 (1997), Christine J. Iversen

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Sixth Amendment: Protecting Defendants' Rights At The Expense Of Child Victims, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 767 (1997), Julie A. Anderson

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

What Is Eleventh Amendment Immunity?, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Supreme Court's Eleventh Amendment decisions give conflicting signals about what the Amendment does. On one view, the Amendment functions as a forum-allocation principle--immunizing states from liability in suits filed in federal court, but leaving open the possibility that states may be compelled to entertain suits against themselves in their own courts. A separate line of cases, however, implies that state courts enjoy an immunity from suit in their own courts and that nothing in the Constitution withdraws such immunity; on this view, the Eleventh Amendment, by protecting the states from suit in the federal courts, effectively immunizes the states …

Section 1983 Litigation, Martin A. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Section 1983 Litigation, Martin A. Schwartz

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.