Courts Commons^™

Officiating Removal, Leah Litman

Articles

For the last several years, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has quietly attempted to curtail capital defendants' representation in state postconviction proceedings. In 2011, various justices on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court began to call for federally funded community defender organizations to stop representing capital defendants in state postconviction proceedings. The justices argued, among other things, that the organizations' representation of capital defendants constituted impermissible federal interference with state governmental processes and burdened state judicial resources. The court also alleged the community defender organizations were in violation of federal statutes, which only authorized the organizations to assist state prisoners in federal, but …

A Matter Of Trial And Error, Or Betting On Appeals, Radek Goral

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

Sampling from the actual portfolio of a leading third-party litigation financier, this Essay demonstrates that making systematic bets on pending appeals is a viable business model applicable to a wide range of cases. “Appellate investments” may include both consumer and commercial cases, including also public-interest actions where prevailing plaintiffs are permitted attorney’s fees—even if they themselves do not seek monetary relief. Additionally, the analyzed sample indicates that appellate funders buy both from plaintiffs and plaintiffs’ attorneys, often in the same case.

The overview of the business strategy of appellate financing contributes to a larger theme: the role and impact of …

When Is An Agency A Court? A Modified Functional Approach To State Agency Removal Under 28 U.S.C. § 1441, Nicholas Jackson

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note argues that courts should interpret 28 U.S.C. § 1441, which permits removal from state court to federal court, to allow removal from state administrative agencies when the agency performs “court-like functions.” Circuits that apply a literal interpretation of the statute and forbid removal from state agencies should adopt this “functional” approach. The functional approach, which this Note calls the McCullion-Floeter test, should be modified to comport with legislative intent and public policy considerations: first, state agency adjudications should not be removable when the adjudication requires technical expertise, which federal courts cannot obtain because they adjudicate cases in a …

The Ethical Limits Of Discrediting The Truthful Witness: How Modern Ethics Rules Fail To Prevent Truthful Witnesses From Being Discredited Through Unethical Means, Todd A. Berger

Marquette Law Review

Whether the criminal defense attorney may ethically discredit the truthful witness on cross-examination and later during closing argument has long been an area of controversy in legal ethics. The vast majority of scholarly discussion on this important ethical dilemma has examined it in the abstract, focusing on the defense attorney’s dual roles in a criminal justice system that is dedicated to searching for the truth while simultaneously requiring zealous advocacy even for the guiltiest of defendants. Unlike these previous works, this particular Article explores this dilemma from the perspective of the techniques that criminal defense attorney’s use on cross-examination and …

Praise Defenders, Not Just Prosecutors, Stephen Henderson

Other Faculty Publications

In this letter to the editor, I discuss the problems when a district court judge becomes a graduate and class spokesperson for a Citizens' Police Academy.See article here.See letter here.

Communicating The Canons: How Lower Courts React When The Supreme Court Changes The Rules Of Statutory Interpretation, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Taxing Legalized Marijuana: How Courts Should Treat Drug Tax Statutes In Light Of The Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause And Executive Non-Enforcement Of The Controlled Substances Act, Joseph A. Goldstein

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Five Days In June When Values Died In American Law, Bruce Ledewitz

Akron Law Review

During a five day period in June, 1992, every Justice on the United States Supreme Court joined one or the other of two opinions that denied the objectivity of values—either Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion in Lee v. Weisman or Justice Scalia’s dissent in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Both of these opinions expressed the view that normative judgments are merely human constructions. This moment represents symbolically the death of values in American law. The arrival of nihilism at the heart of American law is a world-changing event for law that must be acknowledged.

The death of values was announced by …

Scout’S Honor: The Boy Scouts, Judicial Ethics, And The Appearance Of Partiality, Daniel Ortner

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Trending @ Rwu Law: Mikela Almeida's Post: Esther Clark Competition Held In R. I. Supreme Court, Mikela Almeida

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

A Look Back: Developing Indiana Law; Post-Bench Reflections Of An Indiana Supreme Court Justice; Selected Developments In Indiana Administrative Law (1989-2012), Frank Sullivan Jr.

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Striving For Efficiency In Administrative Litigation: North Carolina's Office Of Administrative Hearings, Julian Mann Iii

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Transparency In Administrative Courts: From The Outside Looking In, Elizabeth Figueroa

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Hashavim H.P.S. Business Information, Ltd. V. The Courts' Administration, Elyakim Rubinstein, Esther Hayut, Uzi Vogelman

Translated Opinions

[This abstract is not part of the Court's opinion and is provided for the reader's convenience. It has been translated from a Hebrew version prepared by Nevo Press Ltd. and is used with its kind permission.]

This case concerned a petition challenging the decision of the Courts Administration (the Respondent) making access to its judgment database contingent upon signing a “guarantee” that comprised, inter alia, a prohibition upon indexing the information in a manner that would allow it to be found through web search engines such as Google and Bing. The Petitioner is a commercial company whose primary activity is …

Current Circuit Splits, Circuit Review Staff

Seton Hall Circuit Review

No abstract provided.

First Impressions, Circuit Review Staff

Seton Hall Circuit Review

No abstract provided.

The Semi-Retirement Of Senior Supreme Court Justices: Examining Their Service On The Courts Of Appeals, Jon A. Gryskiewicz

Seton Hall Circuit Review

No abstract provided.

Rwu Law Launches Legal Clinic For Disabled Veterans, Roger Williams University School Of Law

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Front Matter

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Court Of Appeals Of Virginia Celebrates Thirty Years Of Service To The Commonwealth, Hon. Stephen R. Mccullough, Hon. Marla Graff Decker

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.