Courts Commons^™

State Court Judges Are Not Bound By Nonoriginalist Supreme Court Interpretations, Lee J. Strang

FIU Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Referee Without A Whistle: Magistrate Judges And Discovery Sanctions In The Seventh Circuit, Landyn Wm. Rookard

Indiana Law Journal

This Note ultimately argues that, if the Seventh Circuit is not willing to reverse its holdings in Alpern v. Lieb and Retired Chicago Police Ass'n v. City of Chicago in light of recent developments, Congress should again clarify its intent. In the face of the crushing "costs of discovery [that] threaten to exceed the amount at issue in all but the largest cases," it is the Seventh Circuit's responsibility to employ all just and legal devices to comply with Congress's mandate "to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding."

Expanding Territorial Bounds: The Recognition Doctrine After Zivotofsky V. Kerry, Nicole Kirkilevich

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Deterring Innovation: New York V. Actavis And The Duty To Subsidize Competitors' Market Entry, Joanna Shepherd

Faculty Articles

This Article examines a relatively new business strategy in the pharmaceutical market -- "product hopping" or "product replacement" -- in which brand pharmaceutical companies shift their marketing efforts from a drug nearing the end of its patent period to a new, substitute drug with a longer patent life. In July 2015, the Second Circuit issued an opinion in the first appellate case addressing pharmaceutical product replacement, New York ex rel. Schneiderman v. Actavis PLC. This Article explains that product replacement is the predictable business response to the incentives created by patent law and state substitution laws, and withdrawing an …

The Long Shadow Of Bush V. Gore: Judicial Partisanship In Election Cases, Michael S. Kang, Joanna M. Shepherd

Faculty Articles

Bush v. Gore decided a presidential election and is the most dramatic election case in our lifetime, but cases like it are decided every year at the state level. Ordinary state courts regularly decide questions of election rules and administration that effectively determine electoral outcomes hanging immediately in the balance. Election cases like Bush v. Gore embody a fundamental worry with judicial intervention into the political process: outcome-driven, partisan judicial decisionmaking. The Article investigates whether judges decide cases, particularly politically sensitive ones, based on their partisan loyalties more than the legal merits of the cases. It presents a novel method …

Ip Litigation In U.S. District Courts: 1994-2014, Matthew Sag

Faculty Articles

This Article undertakes a broad-based empirical review of intellectual property ("IP") litigation in U.S. federal district courts from 1994 to 2014. Unlike the prior literature, this study analyzes federal copyright, patent, and trademark litigation trends as a unified whole. It undertakes a systematic analysis of the records of more than 190,000 cases filed in federal courts and examines the subject matter, geographical, and temporal variation within federal IP litigation over the last two decades.

This Article analyzes changes in the distribution of IP litigation over time and their regional distribution. The key findings of this Article stem from an attempt …

Evidence Laundering In A Post-Herring World, Kay L. Levine, Jenia I. Turner, Ronald F. Wright

Faculty Articles

The Supreme Court’s decision in Herring v. United States authorizes police to defeat the Fourth Amendment’s protections through a process we call evidence laundering. Evidence laundering occurs when one police officer makes a constitutional mistake when gathering evidence and then passes that evidence along to a second officer, who develops it further and then delivers it to prosecutors for use in a criminal case. The original constitutional taint disappears in the wash.

Courts have allowed evidence laundering in a variety of contexts, from cases involving flawed databases to cases stemming from faulty judgments and communication lapses in law enforcement teams. …

Confirm Judge Koh For The Ninth Circuit, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

On February 25, 2016, President Barack Obama appointed United States District Court Judge Lucy Haeran Koh for a judicial emergency vacancy on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The jurist has served professionally for more than six years in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, ably resolving major litigation. Thus, White House efforts to confirm her were unsurprising. Nevertheless, 2016 is a presidential election year when delay infuses many court appointments. That conundrum was exacerbated because the United States Senate Republican majority refused to even consider United States Court of Appeals …

A Further Note On Federal Causes Of Action, John F. Preis

Law Faculty Publications

In the article, I argue that federal causes of action ought to be treated as (1) distinct from substantive rights, (2) synonymous with the availability of a remedy (but not whether a remedy will in fact issue) and (3) distinct from subject matter jurisdiction (unless Congress instructs otherwise). This thesis is built principally on a historical recounting of the cause of action from eighteenth century England to twenty-first century America. In taking an historical approach, I did not mean to argue that federal courts are bound to adhere to centuries-old conceptions of the cause of action. I merely used history …

Batson V. Kentucky Reflections Inspired By A Podcast, Nancy S. Marder

Kentucky Law Journal

An episode of More Perfect, a podcast devoted to the US. Supreme Court, focused on Batson v. Kentucky, which just marked its thirtieth anniversary. This podcast serves as the starting point for reflections on Batson v. Kentucky, a case in which the Court maintained the peremptory challenge while trying to eliminate discriminatory peremptory challenges. The podcast contributes to our understanding of Batson in several ways. First, it allows listeners to hear from participants in the case and how they viewed their situation at the time. Second, it considers whether Batson has been effective in ridding jury selection …

Transgressions Of A Timid Judiciary: Our Highest Court's Refusal To Overturn Abood V. Board Of Education—Harris V. Quinn, Joe E. Ling

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Rule Of Unanimity's Circuit Splitting Effect: The Problem With Consent—Griffioen V. Cedar Rapids & Iowa City Railway Co., Aaron P. Meland

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Domestic Violence And The Politics Of Self-Help, Elizabeth L. Macdowell

Scholarly Works

Self-help programs are conceptualized as alternatives to attorney representation that can help both courts and unrepresented litigants. The rhetoric of self-help also typically includes empowering unrepresented individuals to help themselves. But how do self-help programs respond to litigants’ efforts at self-advocacy? This Article reports findings from a study of courthouse self-help programs assisting unrepresented litigants applying for protection orders. The central finding is that self-help staff members were not neutral in the provision of services despite a professed ethic of neutrality. Using the sociological concept of demeanor, this Article shows that staff members rewarded protection order applicants who conformed to …

Crossing The Line: Daubert, Dual Roles, And The Admissibility Of Forensic Mental Health Testimony, Sara Gordon

Scholarly Works

Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals often testify as forensic experts in civil commitment and criminal competency proceedings. When an individual clinician assumes both a treatment and a forensic role in the context of a single case, however, that clinician forms a dual relationship with the patient—a practice that creates a conflict of interest and violates professional ethical guidelines. The court, the parties, and the patient are all affected by this conflict and the biased testimony that may result from dual relationships. When providing forensic testimony, the mental health professional’s primary duty is to the court, not to the patient, …

Limiting Deterrence: Judicial Resistance To Detention Of Asylum-Seekers In Israel And The United States, Michael Kagan

Scholarly Works

Governments have advanced the argument that asylum-seekers may be detained in order to deter other would-­be asylum­-seekers from coming. But in recent litigation in the United States and Israel, this justification for mass detention met with significant resistance from courts. This Essay looks at the way the American and Israeli courts dealt with the proposed deterrence rationale for asylum-seeker detention. It suggests that general deterrence raises three sequential questions:

1. Is deterrence ever legitimate as a stand alone justification for depriving people of liberty?

2. If deterrence is sometimes legitimate, is it valid as a general matter in migration control, …

The Danger Zone: How The Dangerousness Standard In Civil Commitment Proceedings Harms People With Serious Mental Illness, Sara Gordon

Scholarly Works

Almost every American state allows civil commitment upon a finding that a person, as a result of mental illness, is gravely disabled and unable to meet their basic needs for food and shelter. Yet in spite of these statutes, most psychiatrists and courts will not commit an individual until they are found to pose a danger to themselves or others. All people have certain rights to be free from unwanted medical treatment, but for people with serious mental illness, those civil liberties are an abstraction, safeguarded for them by a system that is not otherwise ensuring access to shelter and …

Why Coywolf Goes To Court, Signa A. Daum Shanks

Articles & Book Chapters

This article is an effort influenced by previous works considered part of "trickster" discourse. But unlike other trickster stories meant to illustrate First Nations’ contents and processes, this presentation creates a Métis-specific example of trickster methodology and knowledge. Similar to the historic role Métis individuals have had in Canadian history, this effort contains a type of "translator" system within its citations so that the main story parallels information about trends in Canadian legal analysis. By having this format, it is hoped that those less familiar with Métis courtroom struggles will gain insight into how the pursuit of Métis constitutionalism both …

A Demographic History Of Federal Judicial Appointments By Gender And Race: 1789-2016, Jonathan K. Stubbs

Law Faculty Publications

This article briefly surveys the constitutional and statutory foundation for the creation of the federal judiciary. It also furnishes data, by sex and race, of the appointment of federal judges to courts of general jurisdiction during each presidential administration from September 24, 1789, through April 11, 2016. Thus, Part I describes the pace of diversification of the federal judiciary. While data regarding other attributes of judges (such as their socioeconomic status) exist, extensive analysis of such characteristics falls outside the parameters of this preliminary analysis. Nonetheless, the Article notes in passing that, since 1989, during each presidential administration, the majority …

The Republican Senate And Regular Order, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Now that the 114th Congress has reached the first session’s conclusion, the purported application of regular order to a major Senate constitutional duty—rendering advice and consent on presidential nominees—merits analysis. This evaluation illuminates serious deficiencies, which plagued 2015 confirmations. Especially important was the GOP’s failure to expeditiously suggest aspirants for White House consideration, and specifically failing to fill “judicial emergencies,” provide hearings and ballots swiftly, conduct floor debates when required rapidly, and confirm more than 11 judges all year. This obstruction has numerous deleterious consequences; the most significant, however, is not fulfilling the constitutional responsibility to proffer advice and consent …

Reports Of Cases In The Court Of Chancery In The Middle Ages, William Hamilton Bryson

Law Faculty Publications

If the history of the law is to be properly written, it must be based upon the primary legal sources. One of the primary source materials of the law is the reports of cases. These are particularly important because here is the best evidence of the judges’ legal reasoning. The court records kept by the clerks of the courts do not give this information as, indeed, it is not their purpose to do any more than record the results of a particular lawsuit for future use. They primarily serve the purpose of res judicata; their value as judicial precedent …