Courts Commons^™

Tel Aviv-Jaffa District Commander V. Israel Internet Association, Uzi Vogelman, Asher Grunis, Noam Sohlberg

Translated Opinions

Facts: In August 2010, the Israel Police ordered major Israeli Internet access providers to block access to eight gambling websites operating outside the State of Israel. The orders were based on section 229 of the Penal Law that permits the District Police Commander to order the closure of any illegal gaming, lottery, or gambling place. The access providers complied with the orders and the Israel Internet Association petitioned the Administrative Affairs Court against the District Commander, contesting the closure, in the interests of Israeli web-users and the general public. The Internet access providers did not petition against the closure of …

The Collision Of Law And Science: American Court Responses To Developments In Forensic Science, Sarah Lucy Cooper

Pace Law Review

This paper considers how American courts have responded to developments in forensic science by focusing on four popular forensic science disciplines: (1) fingerprint identification (friction ridge analysis); (2) firearms identification (tool-mark analysis); (3) bite mark identification (forensic odontology); and (4) arson investigation (fire science). Part I briefly explores the relationship between law and science. Part II charts the development of the legal frameworks that govern the admissibility of expert evidence in America. Part III discusses the identification methods employed by these four disciplines and provides examples of erroneous identifications. Part IV comments on the NAS Report findings that relate to …

Buying A Judicial Seat For Appeal: Caperton V. A.T. Massey Coal Company, Inc., Is Right Out Of A John Grisham Novel, Richard Gillespie

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court's Take On Immigration In Nken V. Holder: Reaffirming A Traditional Standard That Affords Courts More Time And Flexibility To Decide Immigration Appeals Before Deporting Aliens, Elizaveta Kabanova

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

California And Uncle Sam's Tug-Of-War Over Mary Jane Is Really Harshing The Mellow, Daniel Mortensen

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Thinking Outside The Bars: Examining All The Options In Sentencing, Lindsay Lasalle, Courtney Bryan, Larry Spottsville, Charles E. Auslander Iii

Working in the Public Interest Conferences

Covers the rationale behind the growing use of alternative court programs in the United States and the common methods applied in these programs.

In Memoriam: The Honorable Harry L. Carrico, Hon. John A. Gibney Jr., Wendy C. Perdue, John G. Douglass, William G. Broaddus, Victoria A.B. Willis

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Issue 3: Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Resolving The Alj Quandary, Kent H. Barnett

Scholarly Works

Three competing constitutional and practical concerns surround federal administrative law judges (“ALJs”), who preside over all formal adjudications within the executive branch. First, if ALJs are “inferior Officers” (not mere employees), as five current Supreme Court Justices have suggested, the current method of selecting many ALJs likely violates the Appointments Clause. Second, a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision reserved the question whether the statutory protections that prevent ALJs from being fired at will impermissibly impinge upon the President’s supervisory power under Article II. Third, these same protections from removal may, on the other hand, be too limited to satisfy impartiality …

Preemption And Choice-Of-Law Coordination, Erin O'Hara O'Connor, Larry E. Ribstein

Michigan Law Review

The doctrine treating federal preemption of state law has been plagued by uncertainty and confusion. Part of the problem is that courts purport to interpret congressional intent when often Congress has never considered the particular preemption question at issue. This Article suggests that courts deciding preemption cases should take seriously a commonly articulated rationale for the federalization of law: the need to coordinate applicable legal standards in order to facilitate a national market or to otherwise provide clear guidance to parties regarding the laws that apply to their conduct. In situations where federal law can serve a coordinating function but …

Statutes In Common Law Courts, Jeffrey A. Pojanowski

Journal Articles

The Supreme Court teaches that federal courts, unlike their counterparts in the states, are not general common law courts. Nevertheless, a perennial point of contention among federal law scholars is whether and how a court’s common law powers affect its treatment of statutes. Textualists point to federal courts’ lack of common law powers to reject purposivist statutory interpretation. Critics of textualism challenge this characterization of federal courts’ powers, leveraging a more robust notion of the judicial power to support purposivist or dynamic interpretation. This disagreement has become more important in recent years with the emergence of a refreshing movement in …

Doe Co., Ltd V. Doe, Uzi Vogelman, Isaac Amit, Esther Hayut

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.]

The Supreme Court (Justice Vogelman, Justices Hayut and Amit, concurring) granted leave to appeal, upheld the appeal and ruled as follows.

The Court considered the proceedings on the premise that the provisions of section 70(e1) of the Courts Act [Consolidated Version], 5744-1984 (hereinafter – the “Act”), which refers to a “suspect” as defined in section 70(e2) of the Act “as someone against whom a …

Take My Child, Please - A Plea For Radical Nonintervention, William M. Marticorena

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The California Youth Authority: Planning For A Better Tomorrow, Pearl S. West

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Statement Of William S. White, William S. White

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Security For Costs Requirement In California - A Violation Of Procedural Due Process?, Jerel L. Ellington

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Compendium Of Major California Juvenile Law Decisions With Brief Analyses, 1979, Michael T. Lubinski, Robert M. Triplett

Pepperdine Law Review

Society has been plagued with the problem of whether the police, the courts and the correction agencies are to administer juveniles for their protection and treatment, or for their punishment. To facilitate a better understanding of juvenile administration the authors have analyzed the California juvenile law cases for the year 1979. The article consists of six major area of interest; parent-child custody, sentencing, procedure, jurisdiction, evidentiary and constitutional which will be used to highlight some of the more significant decisions in the past year, thus enabling the reader to assess changes occurring in the juvenile system.

Fare V. Michael C.: Juveniles And In Custodial Interrogations , Gregory S. Chudacoff

Pepperdine Law Review

In the principal case, Fare v. Michael C., the United States Supreme Court rejects the position of the Supreme Court of California that a juvenile's request for the presence of his probation officer constitutes an invocation of the juvenile's right to remain silent within the meaning of the Miranda decision. The author examines the rationale applied by each court enroute to this split of opinion, and suggests a middle ground which would accommodate the concerns of both courts with respect to the protection of an accused juvenile at the custodial interrogation stage.

Status Offenders Should Be Removed From The Juvenile Court , Luke Quinn, Peter M. Hutchison

Pepperdine Law Review

Inadequate financial resources and overcrowded juvenile placement facilities have frequently been cited as grounds for the abrogation of the juvenile court's practice of retaining jurisdiction over status offenders. In this article, Judge Quinn suggests the existence of even more compelling reasons which support diversion of status offenders to programs better suited to their particular needs. The author contends that the juvenile court's jurisdiction should be confined to matters of fact-finding and adjudication, rather than intruding into areas within the domain of the parents, and into areas in which the court lacks the necessary expertise. It is argued that diversion of …

A Rationale For The Abolition Of The Juvenile Court's Power To Waive Jurisdiction , John Gasper, Daniel Katkin

Pepperdine Law Review

The juvenile court's power to waive jurisdiction which entails the transfer of juvenile offenders to adult courts presents a topic of longstanding controversy. It's rationale, one of protection of the public, has been labeled by the authors as untenable. Moreover, it is asserted that waiver of jurisdiction in such cases contravenes the very cornerstone of the juvenile court process--the doctrine of parens patriae. Three methods of transfer are seen to exist--legislative, prosecutorial, and judicial. Focusing on the latter, the authors posit an argument advocating the abrogation of the concept of waiver. Justification for this proposition is seen to flow from …