A Judicial Solution To The Forum-Selection Clause Enforcement Circuit Split: Giving Erie A Second Chanc,
2012
University of Georgia School of Law
A Judicial Solution To The Forum-Selection Clause Enforcement Circuit Split: Giving Erie A Second Chanc, Kelly A. Blair
Georgia Law Review
In The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., the Supreme
Court established the federal standard of enforcing forum-
selections clauses as presumptively reasonable. The Court,
however, first addressed the enforceability of forum-
selection clauses in a diversity case in Stewart
Organization, Inc. v. Ricoh Corp., in which the Court held
that under Erie, federal law, specifically 28 U.S.C.
§ 1404(a), governs the enforceability of forum-selection
clauses. After Stewart, a split within the United States
Courts of Appeals developed when litigants used Rule 12
motions to dismiss-a procedural vehicle unaddressed by
the Stewart Court-to enforce these clauses. The circuit
split has two …
Runaway Usance: Limiting The Exercise Of The Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine In The Context Of Wenqin Sun V. Mukasey And Bright V. Holder,
2012
Univeristy of Georgia School of Law
Runaway Usance: Limiting The Exercise Of The Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine In The Context Of Wenqin Sun V. Mukasey And Bright V. Holder, Lawrence S. Winsor
Georgia Law Review
The fugitive disentitlement doctrine prevents an evasive
party from obtaining standing in the court whose
authority is evaded. With its 2011 decision in Bright v.
Holder, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals created a circuit
split regarding whether the fugitive disentitlement
doctrine applies to an alien appealing an adverse
immigration decision that maintained the same address
throughout removal proceedings, this address was known
to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and DHS
made no attempt to locate or arrest the alien for failure to
report for removal. Unlike the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals' decision in Wenqin Sun v. Mukasey, …
Understanding The Exceptional And Dynamic Nature Of Boumediene Rights To Court Access,
2012
Fordham University School of Law
Understanding The Exceptional And Dynamic Nature Of Boumediene Rights To Court Access, Andrew Kent
Faculty Scholarship
This short piece replies to Professor Steve Vladeck's comments on my essay 'Do Boumediene Rights Expire?' 161 U. Pa. L. Rev. Pennumbra 20 (2012), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2166103. In this reply, I further develop the argument that Boumediene rights to court access may have expired for those Guantanamo detainees determined through habeas litigation to be enemy fighters; and whether these judicially-confirmed enemy fighters have continuing rights court access under Boumediene goes to the federal courts' subject matter jurisdiction, meaning that the Obama administration's concession of continued court access is inoperative and federal courts must sua sponte raise and decide the issue.
(Dys)Functionality,
2012
Notre Dame Law School
(Dys)Functionality, Mark P. Mckenna
Journal Articles
The functionality doctrine serves a unique role in trademark law: unlike virtually every other doctrine, functionality can trump consumer confusion (or so it seems, at least in mechanical-functionality cases). In this sense, functionality may be the only doctrine in trademark law that can truly be considered a defense. But despite its potential power, the functionality doctrine is quite inconsistently applied. This is true of mechanical functionality cases because courts differ over the extent to which the doctrine focuses on competitors’ right to copy unpatented features as opposed to their need to copy. And aesthetic functionality cases are even more scattered: …
Suing Courts,
2012
University of Colorado Law School
Suing Courts, Frederic Bloom, Christopher Serkin
Publications
This Article argues for a new and unexpected mechanism of judicial accountability: suing courts. Current models of court accountability focus almost entirely on correcting legal errors. A suit against the court would concentrate on something different--on providing transition relief, by way of legal remedy, to those bearing the heaviest burdens of desirable legal change. These suits may at first appear impossible. But suing courts is conceptually rational and mechanically reasonable, a tool that eases legal transitions while navigating the many hurdles modern doctrine puts in the way. This Article sets out the first complete account of how, where, and why …
Incitement To Riot In The Age Of Flash Mobs,
2012
University of Colorado Law School
Incitement To Riot In The Age Of Flash Mobs, Margot E. Kaminski
Publications
As people increasingly use social media to organize both protests and robberies, government will try to regulate these calls to action. With an eye to this intensifying dynamic, this Article reviews First Amendment jurisprudence on incitement and applies it to existing statutes on incitement to riot at a common law, state, and federal level. The article suggests that First Amendment jurisprudence has a particularly tortuous relationship with regulating speech directed to crowds. It examines current crowd psychology to suggest which crowd behavior, if any, should as a matter of policy be subject to regulation. It concludes that many existing incitement-to-riot …
"Bad Juror" Lists And The Prosecutor's Duty To Disclose,
2012
American University Washington College of Law
"Bad Juror" Lists And The Prosecutor's Duty To Disclose, Ira Robbins
Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals
Prosecutors sometimes use what are known as "bad juror" lists to exclude particular citizens from jury service. Not only does this practice interfere with an open and fair jury-selection process, thus implicating a defendant's right to be tried by a jury of his or her peers, but it also violates potential jurors' rights to serve in this important capacity. But who is on these lists? And is a prosecutor required to disclose the lists to defense counsel? These questions have largely gone unnoticed by legal analysts. This Article addresses the prosecutor's duty to disclose bad-juror lists. It reviews the federal …
Assessment Of The Jury System For The Ninth Judicial Circuit Court, Michigan,
2012
National Center for State Courts
Assessment Of The Jury System For The Ninth Judicial Circuit Court, Michigan, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Daniel J. Hall
Faculty Publications
Under a contract between the Ninth Judicial Circuit Court of Michigan and the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), the NCSC Center for Jury Studies conducted an assessment of jury operations in the circuit and district courts, particularly focused on the extent to which jury pools in those respective courts reflect a fair cross section of the community, to identify factors that may affect the demographic composition of the jury pool, and to make recommendations to improve representation as necessary. The Ninth Judicial Circuit Court employs a one-step process to summon and qualify jurors for the countywide circuit court in …
The Evolution Of The Summary Trial: A Flexible Tool To Meet A Variety Of Needs,
2012
National Center for State Courts
The Evolution Of The Summary Trial: A Flexible Tool To Meet A Variety Of Needs, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Nicole L. Waters
Faculty Publications
Are summary jury trials a viable forum for dispute resolution? The National Center for State Courts studied summary trials in six state courts to understand how these programs work and to determine the benefits and detriments of this approach to dispute resolution.
Possession And Knowledge In The Misuse Of Drugs Act: Nagaenthran A/L K Dharmalingam V. Public Prosecutor,
2012
Singapore Management University
Possession And Knowledge In The Misuse Of Drugs Act: Nagaenthran A/L K Dharmalingam V. Public Prosecutor, Siyuan Chen, Nathaniel Poon-Ern Khng
Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law
When the Court of Appeal rendered the decision of Tan Kiam Peng in 2008, it was unable to come to a conclusive determination of the correct interpretation of s. 18(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act, a provision pertaining to the presumption of an accused’s knowledge of the nature of the controlled drugs in his possession. This issue was presented to a differently constituted Court of Appeal in Nagaenthran, which seemingly ruled in favour of the narrow interpretation of s. 18(2) as opposed to the broader interpretation. Nagaenthran, however, did not address the questions raised by Tan Kiam Peng vis-à-vis …
The Expanding Limits Of Prosecutorial Discretion: Ramalingam Ravinthran V Attorney-General [2012] Sgca 2,
2012
Singapore Management University
The Expanding Limits Of Prosecutorial Discretion: Ramalingam Ravinthran V Attorney-General [2012] Sgca 2, Siyuan Chen
Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law
The applicant was convicted of drug trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act and sentenced to hang. His appeal to the Court of Appeal was unsuccessful, but he filed a Criminal Motion to reopen judgment. He alleged a violation of his right to equality guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore; the alleged violation occurred when another accused who was involved in the same criminal enterprise (both had trafficked the same bag containing the drugs) was charged with trafficking in an amount of drugs quantified just below the threshold for the mandatory death penalty, while the accused was …
A Dynamic Model Of Doctrinal Choice,
2012
Washington University in St. Louis School of Law
A Dynamic Model Of Doctrinal Choice, Scott Baker, Pauline Kim
Scholarship@WashULaw
This paper develops a repeated game model of the choice of doctrinal form by a higher court. Doctrine can take any point along a continuum from more determinate, rule-like legal commands to more flexible, standard-like directives. In deciding a case, the Supreme Court not only decides on a substantive outcome, but also chooses where on this continuum to set the doctrine. The lower court then applies the legal command to future cases. In doing so, it may wish to take into account new information, but the cost of doing so varies with the form of the legal doctrine. The model …
Does Ideology Matter In Bankruptcy? Voting Behavior On The Courts Of Appeals,
2012
Washington University in St. Louis School of Law
Does Ideology Matter In Bankruptcy? Voting Behavior On The Courts Of Appeals, Rafael I. Pardo, Jonathan Remy Nash
Scholarship@WashULaw
This Article empirically examines the question of whether courts of appeals judges cast ideological votes in the context of bankruptcy. The empirical study is unique insofar as it is the first to specifically examine the voting behavior of circuit court judges in bankruptcy cases. More importantly, it focuses on a particular type of dispute that arises in bankruptcy - debt-dischargeability determinations. The study implements this focused approach in order to reduce heterogeneity in result. We find, contrary to our hypotheses, no evidence that circuit court judges engage in ideological voting in bankruptcy cases. We do find, however, non-ideological factors - …
Supreme Court Prequel: Justice Stevens On The Seventh Circuit Symposium,
2012
Washington University in St. Louis School of Law
Supreme Court Prequel: Justice Stevens On The Seventh Circuit Symposium, Stefanie A. Lindquist
Scholarship@WashULaw
Justice Stevens’s retirement from the U.S. Supreme Court has occasioned numerous retrospectives on his lengthy career as a Supreme Court Justice. Yet Justice Stevens’s career began on the Seventh Circuit and his voting behavior and doctrinal positions on the circuit court provide a unique window into his judicial character and the roots of his thinking on important issues that continued to preoccupy him on the Supreme Court. In this Essay, I first analyze then-Judge Stevens’s voting behavior on the court of appeals by examining the frequency with which he wrote separate opinions, as well as his voting interagreement with his …
Salinger V. Colting,
2012
New York Law School
Trademark Dilution And Corporate Personhood,
2011
Boston Univeristy School of Law
Trademark Dilution And Corporate Personhood, Stacey Dogan
Shorter Faculty Works
It’s become almost passé to decry our federal trademark dilution laws. The laws – first passed in 1995 and amended in 2006 – protect “famous trademarks” against uses that are likely to dilute their distinctiveness, without regard to any confusion among consumers or competition between the parties. Early critics warned that passage of the anti-dilution statute marked a turning point in trademark law: by giving famous trademark holders rights against even non-confusing uses of their marks, the law created “property”-like rights in trademarks. The initial commentary on the statute focused mainly on the costs associated with this increasingly absolutist approach …
Reflecting On Appeals On Questions Of Law Arising Out Of Domestic Arbitration Awards,
2011
Singapore Management University
Reflecting On Appeals On Questions Of Law Arising Out Of Domestic Arbitration Awards, Darius Chan, Paul Tan
Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law
Domestic arbitration awards rendered under the Arbitration Act (Cap 10, 2002 Rev Ed) (“the Act”) can be subject to appeal on a question of law arising out of an award. Unless parties consent, an appeal can only be brought with the leave of court.
The Judicial Power And The Inferior Federal Courts: Exploring The Constitutional Vesting Thesis,
2011
Washington and Lee University School of Law
The Judicial Power And The Inferior Federal Courts: Exploring The Constitutional Vesting Thesis, A. Benjamin Spencer
Scholarly Articles
The third branch of our federal government has traditionally been viewed as the least of the three in terms of the scope of its power and authority. This view finds validation when one considers the extensive authority that Congress has been permitted to exercise over the Federal Judiciary. From the beginning, Congress has understood itself to possess the authority to limit the jurisdiction of inferior federal courts. The Supreme Court has acquiesced to this understanding of congressional authority without much thought or explanation.
It may be possible, however, to imagine a more robust vision of the Judicial Power through closer …
Rebel Without A Clause: The Irrelevance Of Article Vi To Constitutional Supremacy,
2011
Boston University School of Law
Rebel Without A Clause: The Irrelevance Of Article Vi To Constitutional Supremacy, Gary Lawson
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
With Stare Decisis and Constitutional Text, Jonathan Mitchell has produced what I think is the most interesting and creative textual defense (or at least partial defense) to date of the use of horizontal precedent in federal constitutional cases. Mitchell's careful analysis of the Supremacy Clause is fascinating and instructive, and he does an impeccable job of drawing out the implications of his premise that the Supremacy Clause prescribes only a very limited choice-of-law rule-a rule that does not, by its own terms, specifically elevate the Constitution above federal statutes and treaties. His innovative and intriguing framework yields four distinct conclusions …
Accessing Justice: The Availability And Adequacy Of Counsel Removal Proceedings: New York Immigrant Representation Study Report,
2011
Brooklyn Law School
Accessing Justice: The Availability And Adequacy Of Counsel Removal Proceedings: New York Immigrant Representation Study Report, Stacy Caplow, Peter L. Markowitz, Jojo Annobil, Peter Z. Cobb, Nancy Morawetz, Oren Root, Claudia Slovinsky, Zhifen Cheng, Lindsay C. Nash
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
