Courts Commons^™

Klabacka V. Nelson, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 24 (May 25, 2017), Christopher Kelly

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) family courts have subject matter jurisdiction in divorce proceedings that involve issues otherwise outside the scope of family courts, (2) parol evidence may not be considered to determine party intent to form separate property agreements and self-settled spendthrift trusts where the written agreements are valid and unambiguous, (3) a court order equalizing assets between different spendthrift trusts is improper because the NRS protects against court orders that move assets from trusts and against moves that do not benefit trust beneficiaries, (4) spendthrift trusts may not be reached for payment of personal obligations not known at …

Injustice Under Law: Perpetuating And Criminalizing Poverty Through The Courts, Judge Lisa Foster

Georgia State University Law Review

Money matters in the justice system. If you can afford to purchase your freedom pretrial, if you can afford to immediately pay fines and fees for minor traffic offenses and municipal code violations, if you can afford to hire an attorney, your experience of the justice system both procedurally and substantively will be qualitatively different than the experience of someone who is poor. More disturbingly, through a variety of policies and practices—some of them blatantly unconstitutional—our courts are perpetuating and criminalizing poverty. And when we talk about poverty in the United States, we are still talking about race, ethnicity, and …

Dueling Grants: Reimagining Cafa’S Jurisdictional Provisions, Tanya Pierce

Georgia State University Law Review

More than a decade after Congress passed the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA), courts continue to disagree as to its application and meaning in a variety of situations, many of which have wide-ranging effects. This article considers a fundamental issue that arises after a certification decision is reached: whether a court’s subject matter jurisdiction under CAFA depends on a class being certified. Specifically, the article considers what happens when a federal court’s subject matter jurisdiction derives solely from CAFA’s minimal diversity jurisdiction provision and a request for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 (Rule 23) …

A Promise Unfulfilled: Challenges To Georgia’S Death Penalty Statute Post-Furman, William Cody Newsome

Georgia State University Law Review

In Furman v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Furman’s counsel. Three Justices agreed that Georgia law, as applied, was arbitrary and potentially discriminatory. Moreover, one Justice challenged the value of the death penalty and doubted it served any of the alleged purposes for which it was employed.

Although many challenges subsequent to Furman have been raised and arguably resolved by the Court, the underlying challenges raised by Furman appear to remain prevalent with the Court. Justice Breyer recently echoed the concurring opinions of Furman in his dissenting opinion from Glossip v. Gross, when he stated: “In …

Supreme Court Institute Annual Report, 2016-2017, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute

SCI Papers & Reports

During the U.S. Supreme Court’s October Term (OT) 2016 – corresponding to the 2016-2017 academic year –the Supreme Court Institute (SCI) provided moot courts for advocates in 100% of the cases heard by the Supreme Court, offered a variety of programs related to the Supreme Court, and continued to integrate the moot court program into the education of Georgetown Law students.

A list of all SCI moot courts held in OT 2016 – arranged by argument sitting and date of moot and including the name and affiliation of each advocate and the number of observers – follows the narrative portion …

Personal Injury Law, Defense V. Plaintiff: A Return To Civility, Daniel Stiffler, Jamie Finizio Bascombe

NSU Law Seminar Series

This particular seminar is designed to educate attorneys on the importance of communicating and navigating a civil case while maintaining a level of professionalism, civility, and integrity to the profession, opposing party, and the court. Learning Outcomes include:

1. How to maintain a level of civility while competently represent clients in civil cases in Florida
2. Review standards of conduct in the context of a lawyer’s responsibility to perceive and protect the image of the profession

The Florida Bar CLE credits - General 2.0, Ethics 0.5 The Florida Bar Certification Credits - Civil Trial 2.0

Rethinking Criminal Contempt, John A.E. Pottow, Jason S. Levin

Articles

It is of course too early to tell whether we are in a new era of bankruptcy judge (dis)respectability. Only time will tell. But this Article performs a specific case study, on one discrete area of bankruptcy court authority, based upon a particular assumption in that regard. The assumption is this: certain high-salience judicial events-here, the recent Supreme Court bankruptcy judge decisions, coupled with earlier constitutional precedents involving the limits of Article III-can trigger overreaction and hysteria. Lower courts may read these Supreme Court decisions as calling into question the permissibility of certain bankruptcy court practices under the Constitution, and …

A Comparative Approach To Counter-Terrorism Legislation And Legal Policy, Paul David Hill Jr

Senior Honors Theses

Since the 9/11 attacks, American legislation and legal policy in regards to classifying and processing captured terrorists has fallen short of being fully effective and lawful. Trial and error by the Bush and Obama administrations has uncovered two key lessons: (1) captured terrorists are not typical prisoners of war and thus their detainment must involve more legal scrutiny than the latter; and (2) captured terrorists are not ordinary criminals and thus the civilian criminal court system, due to constitutional constraints, is not capable of adequately trying every count of terrorism. Other nations, including France and Israel, approach this problem with …

The Impact Of Roe V. Wade (1973) On The American Abortion Rights Movement, Claire M. Adkins

Senior Honors Projects, 2010-2019

My research examines the impact of the Supreme Court case, Roe v. Wade (1973), on the American abortion rights movement during the 1970s. Previous research is divided on the extent of the Court’s influence on social movements and I seek to fill a gap in the previous literature. I conduct an in-depth document analysis to measure the Court’s effect on the abortion rights movement. Specifically, I examine abortion sections from the 1970s feminist publications, “Our Bodies Ourselves” and “off our backs,” to represent the American abortion rights movement. Both publications offer slightly different feminist perspectives with abortion rights advocacy and …

Foster V. Chatman: A Missed Opportunity For Batson And The Peremptory Challenge, Nancy Marder

All Faculty Scholarship

In 2016, the United States Supreme Court decided that the prosecutors in Foster v. Chatman exercised race-based peremptory challenges in violation of Batson v. Kentucky. The Court reached the right result, but missed an important opportunity. The Court should have acknowledged that after thirty years of the Batson experiment, it is clear that Batson is unable to stop discriminatory peremptory challenges. Batson is easy to evade, so discriminatory peremptory challenges persist and the harms from them are significant. The Court could try to strengthen Batson in an effort to make it more effective, but in the end the only way …

The Replacements: Conflicting Standards For Obtaining New Counsel Under The Sixth Amendment, Sharon Finegan

Cleveland State Law Review

In 2006, the Supreme Court handed down a decision in United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez emphasizing the importance of a defendant’s right to counsel of choice under the Sixth Amendment and holding a denial of this right constitutes structural error, requiring automatic reversal. Following that decision, several federal circuit courts and state appellate courts have questioned how to apply this right to circumstances where the right to choice of counsel and the right to appointed counsel overlap. When a defendant seeks to replace retained counsel for appointed counsel, should the standard governing his motion fall under the right to choice of …

Different Voices : Measuring Female Judges' Influence On Women's Rights Issues In The U.S. Courts Of Appeal., Alyson E Hendricks

College of Arts & Sciences Senior Theses

Beginning with President Carter and continuing with each successive president, the federal bench has become more diverse. This has caused scholars to turn their attention to how personal characteristics such as race and sex affect judging. Understanding the effects of gender and race on judging is crucial because white female and minority female judges may bring a different perspective to the bench than their male counterparts due to their shared experiences with discrimination. To fill a gap in the literature, this study examines the impact of women in terms of legal influence and voting behavior. The results demonstrate that women …

The Empirics Of Child Custody, Margaret Ryznar

Cleveland State Law Review

Child custody issues are as American as apple pie, with only a quarter of children seeing their parents married until the end. The legal standard for custody is the best interests of the child, but the greyness of this inquiry allows courts to make difficult judgments. In family law, such discretionary standards govern factually diverse cases and make it difficult to draw conclusions from individual cases. This Article offers an objective measurement in family law by empirically examining a sample of Indiana divorce cases filed during three months in 2008 that involved children. The resulting analysis of child custody and …

Book Review: The Betrayal: The Nuremberg Trials And German Divergence, Anton Weiss-Wendt

Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal

No abstract provided.

Chevron’S Pure Questions: Searching For Meaning In Ambiguity, Neal A. Hoopes

BYU Law Review

Since implied congressional intent is the basis for the Chevron doctrine, courts cannot simply presume that Congress intends all unclear statutes to signal deference to agencies. Instead, courts must make some inquiry into whether that rationale remains true under the particular circumstances. This Note contends, then, that the Chevron framework, from the outset, asks the wrong question. Instead of inquiring whether the statute is clear, courts should determine whether Congress intended courts to defer to an agency on the question of statutory interpretation. Instinctively deferring to an agency in the face of every ambiguity undermines congressional intent. While implied congressional …

Factors In Fairness And Emotion In Online Case Resolution Systems, Youyang Hou, Cliff Lampe, Maximilian Bulinski, J. J. Prescott

Articles

Courts are increasingly adopting online information and communication technology, creating a need to consider the potential consequences of these tools for the justice system. Using survey responses from 209 litigants who had recently used an online case resolution system, we investigate factors that influenced litigants’ experiences of fairness and emotional feelings toward court officials. Our results show that ease of using the online case resolution system, the outcome of the case, and a litigant’s perceptions of procedural justice are positively associated both with whether the litigant views the process as fair and whether the litigant ultimately feels positive emotions toward …

Searching For Federal Judicial Power: Article Iii And The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Reciprocal Legitimation In The Federal Courts System, Neil S. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

Much scholarship in law and political science has long understood the U.S. Supreme Court to be the “apex” court in the federal judicial system, and so to relate hierarchically to “lower” federal courts. On that top-down view, exemplified by the work of Alexander Bickel and many subsequent scholars, the Court is the principal, and lower federal courts are its faithful agents. Other scholarship takes a bottom-up approach, viewing lower federal courts as faithless agents or analyzing the “percolation” of issues in those courts before the Court decides. This Article identifies circumstances in which the relationship between the Court and other …

Resurrecting Miranda's Right To Counsel, David Rossman

Faculty Scholarship

The regime created by Miranda v. Arizona is at this point in its history bankrupt both intellectually and in terms of practical effect. Justices who have joined the Court after Miranda have cut back its scope by stingy interpretations of the doctrine’s reach and effect. In practice, few suspects actually benefit from the way Miranda is now implemented in police stations and courtrooms. Given the failure of Miranda’s promise, can we envision an alternative? Here is one that may be politically palatable and doctrinally feasible, largely adopted from English practice:

1. Police would give the same Miranda warnings that they …

The Prophylactic Fifth Amendment, Tracey Maclin

Faculty Scholarship

Before Miranda was decided, the Court had not squarely confronted the issue of when a violation of the Fifth Amendment occurs. Over fifty years ago, the Court acknowledged that the right against self-incrimination has two interrelated facets: The Government may not use compulsion to elicit self-incriminating statements; and the Government may not permit the use in a criminal trial of self-incriminating statements elicited by compulsion. Back then, the “conceptual difficulty of pinpointing” when a constitutional violation occurs — when the Government employs compulsion, or when the compelled statement is actually admitted at trial — was unimportant. Chavez v. Martinez forced …