Courts Commons^™

Dispute System Design: A Comparative Study Of India, Israel And California, Janet Martinez, Sheila Purcell, Hagit Shaked-Gvili, Mohan Mehta

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

Alternative dispute resolution ("ADR") is practiced around the world with myriad approaches, though not without common ground. In an increasingly interconnected world, the sharing of this knowledge and experience has become a natural and even necessary step in the evolution of ADR. Professor Frank Sander, of Harvard Law School, spoke at the Pound Conference in 1976 and posed the notion of the multi-door courthouse, a concept that led to the development of ADR process options in courts throughout the country.

Arbitration And The Future Of Delaware's Corporate Law Franchise, Brian Jm Quinn

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

On September 9, 2011, Skyworks Solutions, Inc. ("Skyworks") and Advanced Analogic Technologies Incorporation ("AATI") entered into a merger agreement. The agreement included an uncommon provision with respect to dispute resolution. In part, that provision stated, "the parties hereto agree that any and all disputes arising under or related in any way to this Agreement or the Transactions shall be resolved solely in arbitration before the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. " Until AATI later sought specific performance of the merger agreement via arbitration pursuant to that provision, little notice had been paid by outside observers to the …

Reconceputualising Security Strategies For Courts: Developing A Typology For Safer Court Environments, Anne Wallace, Deborah Blackman, Emma Rowden

Research outputs 2013

There have been heightened concerns about security in courts in recent years, prompting a strong response that has largely been focused on perimeter security. This paper draws on recent research conducted in Australian on court user’s safety needs, to propose a typology for designing safer courtroom environments that moves beyond the entry point to the court, and incorporates consideration of process and design elements.

International Perspectives On Correcting Wrongful Convictions: The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, Lissa Griffin

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Part I of this Article traces the history of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) and outlines the procedures employed by the SCCRC after an application is received, with particular attention to its extensive investigatory procedures. It also describes and analyzes the standards for referral of an application to the Scottish court. Part II briefly sets forth the statistics concerning applications, referrals, and judicial decisions. Part III includes an analysis of the SCCRC’s work by looking at the cases that have been referred and decided by the court. Those cases are divided into several categories: fresh evidence referrals, referrals …

Trying Terrorism: Joint Criminal Enterprise, Material Support, And The Paradox Of International Criminal Law, Alexandra Link

Michigan Journal of International Law

This Note will examine theoretical problems in ICL and public international law by evaluating the practical implications of applying ICL sources to find criminal liability outside the narrow confines of the international tribunals. It will examine the problems posed by the conflicting standards of the Rome Statute and ICTY jurisprudence as a matter of customary international law, the failure of U.S. courts to effectively confront the contextual and doctrinal analysis necessary to determine the limitations of these sources, and the proper application of these sources to the issues raised in Hamdan II and Al Bahlul. Viewing ICL through the lens …

Should There Be A Presumption Favoring Awards Of Attorney’S Fees In Copyright Litigation?, 12 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 630 (2013), William T. Mcgrath

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Section 505 of the Copyright Act allows courts to award attorney’s fees to the prevailing party in a copyright case. Almost twenty years ago, the Supreme Court in Fogerty resolved a split among the circuits over the interpretation of that statute. First, it held that courts should apply several nonexclusive factors when determining if the prevailing party, whether defendant or plaintiff, should be entitled to recover attorney’s fees. Second, the Court refused to apply a presumption that the prevailing party will automatically recover attorney’s fees, opting instead for the districts courts to apply “equitable discretion” in awarding fees. But in …

Preliminary Injunction Standards In Massachusetts State And Federal Courts, Arthur D. Wolf

Faculty Scholarship

Concurrent jurisdiction frequently allows attorneys the choice of filing a complaint in state or federal court. State courts presumptively have jurisdiction over claims rooted in federal law. At times, state courts are required to entertain federal claims. Similarly, federal courts have authority over state claims because of diversity, federal question, and supplemental jurisdiction. Many claims are rooted in both state and federal law, such as antitrust, civil rights, environmental, consumer protection, and civil liberties. Confronted with the choice of state or federal court, the attorney must evaluate a variety of factors before deciding in which court to file.

In a …

Defying Gravity: The Development Of Standards In The International Prosecution Of International Atrocity Crimes, Matthew H. Charity

Faculty Scholarship

The International Criminal Court (the “ICC”), now one decade old, is still in the process of setting norms as to scope, jurisdiction, and other issues. One issue that has thus far defied resolution is a key issue of jurisdiction: the place of complementarity in deciding whether certain criminal issues impacting international standards or interests should be decided before the ICC or national tribunals. Although the Rome Statute crystallizes definitions of core international crimes that may be tried before the ICC, the process of determining whether to leave jurisdiction with the nation or allowing jurisdiction to the ICC continues to lack …

Miranda And Its (More Rights-Protective) International Counterparts, Megan A. Fairlie

Faculty Publications

The goal of this article is to encourage the international legal community to revisit its unexamined acceptance of strategic communications. This can lead to a debate that, at a minimum, should prompt Court supporters — specifically civil society members — to think carefully before engaging in conduct that creates dangerous consequences for the ICC.

The Efficacy Of The Negative Injunction In Breach Of Entertainment Contracts, 46 J. Marshall L. Rev. 409 (2013), Eliot Axelrod

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Sky Is Falling (Again): Evaluating The Current Funding Crisis In The Judiciary, Donald E. Campbell

Journal Articles

This Article will consider the current crisis in a broad historical context. This larger narrative can provide a helpful perspective in the current debate. It offers a glimpse into how we came to the current system and allows us to question our assumptions regarding the way the system currently works. Historical context is an important (and under-discussed) aspect of this crisis. As the leaders of the bench and bar come together to evaluate changes to the current system, the discussion should begin with understanding how the system evolved to where it is now and with appreciating the fact that the …

Post-Crisis Reconsideration Of Federal Court Reform , David R. Cleveland

Cleveland State Law Review

While the language of crisis has diminished, the caseload volume problem continues to bedevil the federal appellate courts, and the altered process adopted describe, there are just too many cases to handle with current resources using the time-honored appellate process; there is no simple solution. The path of least resistance—sacrificing appellate standards—has proven workable and effective, and the more significant steps such as reducing appeals or increasing judicial resources have gone unadopted. Various studies and proposals of the federal court system have suggested other methods that could be used to address the problem, and these methods should be seriously considered …

Judicial Independence: New Challenges In Established Nations, Martin Shapiro

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Because courts are both conflict-resolving and lawmaking bodies, they should be both independent and accountable. This paradox of incidence and accountability cannot be resolved but only addressed by various and shifting pragmatic accommodations between independence and accountability. Prosecutors, trial courts, appeals courts, and constitutional courts are each subject to differing consideration in arriving at such accommodations.

Moreover, courts, as courts of law, are not independent but are agents of statutory and constitutional lawmakers. Excessive emphasis on judicial independence creates the danger that authoritarian regimes may achieve a cloak of legitimacy for their laws by having them enforced by independent judiciaries. …

The Stricter Standard: An Empirical Assessment Of Daubert’S Effect On Civil Defendants, Andrew Jurs, Scott Devito

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Giving Consumers A Leg To Stand On: Finding Plaintiffs A Legislative Solution To The Barrier From Federal Courts In Data Security Breach Suits, Patricia Cave

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Jurisdiction Of The Court Of Federal Claims And Forum Shopping In Money Claims Against The Federal Government, Gregory C. Sisk

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Where Corporations Are: Why Casual Visits To New York Are Bad For Business, Jeanne L. Schroeder, David G. Carlson

Articles

In this article, we examine the recent case of Hotel 71 Mezz Lender LLC v. Falor (2010), from the New York Court of Appeals. In this case, New York’s highest court held that LLCs are “present” in New York for jurisdictional purposes when the president of the LLC has submitted to New York jurisdiction in an unrelated law suit against him personally, and where the president came to New York for a deposition in that action. This, we claim, was unconstitutional. In addition, the New York Court of Appeals pronounced itself obliged by the United States Constitution to change the …

The Judicial Reform In China: The Status Quo And Future Directions, Ji Weidong

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

This article shows that Chinese adjudication is in a dilemma: on one hand, the judicial discretion is extensive; on the other hand, public opinion supervision is adopted to control the discretion. In fact, the public opinion and judicial discretion could co-exist and compliment one another. There is no objective and stable framework regulating both. There are attempts aiming to completely negate the judicial discretion, such as computer sentencing. A strange logic of judicial reform exists in China: either eliminating the judicial discretion through such mechanical methods as computer sentencing in the hope to guarantee judgment in conformity with the law; …

Of Civil Wrongs And Rights: Kiyemba V. Obama And The Meaning Of Freedom, Separation Of Powers, And The Rule Of Law Ten Years After 9/11, Katherine L. Vaughns, Heather L. Williams

Faculty Scholarship

This article is about the rise and fall of continued adherence to the rule of law, proper application of the separation of powers doctrine, and the meaning of freedom for a group of seventeen Uighurs—a Turkic Muslim ethnic minority whose members reside in the Xinjiang province of China—who had been held at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base since 2002. Most scholars regard the trilogy of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, and Boumediene v. Bush as demonstrating the Supreme Court’s willingness to uphold the rule of law during the war on terror. The recent experience of the Uighurs …

Telus: Asking The Right Questions About General Warrants, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The general warrant provisions in the Criminal Code have often been interpreted by lower courts in a way which threatens to make that power quite open-ended, and to make those warrants available as a way of making an "end run" around the requirements of other provisions. This note argues that the Supreme Court of Canada is correct, in Telus,to adopt a "substantive equivalence" approach to general warrants, thereby limiting the circumstances in which they can be used. Lower courts have sometimes taken the view that a general warrant is only unavailable if the proposed technique would fall squarely within some …