Jurisdiction Commons^™

The Impasse Of Tibetan Justice: Spain's Exercise Of Universal Jurisdiction In Prosecuting Chinese Genocide, Craig Peters

Seattle University Law Review

Universal jurisdiction is the progressive and contentious legal principle that courts have competence to adjudicate cases involving alleged violations of international law regardless of the nation in which those crimes occurred, the nationality of the victim, or the nationality of the perpetrator. While the limits of more conventional theories of jurisdiction are defined by sovereignty, territory, and nationality, the exercise of universal jurisdiction is based solely on the nature of the crime alleged. That is, when a crime is so serious that it violates peremptory norms of international law, courts are entitled, or even obliged, to hear those cases regardless …

Blood And Privacy: Towards A "Testing-As-Search" Paradigm Under The Fourth Amendment, Andrei Nedelcu

Seattle University Law Review

A vehicle on a public thoroughfare is observed driving erratically and careening across the roadway. After the vehicle strikes another passenger car and comes to a stop, the responding officer notices in the driver the telltale symptoms of intoxication—bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and a distinct odor of intoxicants. On these facts, a lawfully-procured warrant authorizing the extraction of the driver’s blood is obtained. However, the document fails to circumscribe the manner and variety of testing that may be performed on the sample. Does this lack of particularity render the warrant constitutionally infirm as a mandate for chemical analysis of the …

Fighting The Tofu: Law And Politics In Scholarship And Adjudication, Stephen M. Feldman

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

Law professors and political scientists often aim to deny, control, or otherwise tame the dynamic interactions of law and politics that are integral to adjudication. The University of Chicago Law Review recently published an issue containing two such articles: Charles L. Barzun's Impeaching Precedent and Eric A. Posner and Adrian Vermeule's Inside or Outside the System. Both articles sought to police the boundary between law and politics, between the internal and external. The two articles, however, struggled to reach that shared goal in strikingly different and ultimately irreconcilable ways, both of which were unavailing. And that is my point: …

Erie And Preemption: Killing One Bird With Two Stones, Jeffrey Rensberger

Indiana Law Journal

The Supreme Court has developed a standard account of the Erie doctrine. The Court has directed different analyses of Erie cases depending upon whether the federal law in question is in the form of a federal rule (or statute) or is instead a judge-made law. But the cases applying the doctrine are difficult to explain using the standard account. Although the Court and commentators have noted that Erie is a type of preemption, they provide little, if any, rigorous analysis of Erie in light of preemption doctrines. This Article attempts to fill that void, offering an extended analysis of Erie …

Transnational Class Actions In The Shadow Of Preclusion, Zachary D. Clopton

Indiana Law Journal

The American class action is a procedural tool that advances substantive law values such as deterrence, compensation, and fairness. Opt-out class actions in particular achieve these goals by aggregating claims not only of active participants but also passive plaintiffs. Full faith and credit then extends the preclusive effect of class judgments to other U.S. courts. But there is no international full faith and credit obligation, and many foreign courts will not treat U.S. class judgments as binding on passive plaintiffs. Therefore, some plaintiffs may be able to wait until the U.S. class action is resolved before either joining the U.S. …

Mardian V. Greenberg Family Trust, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 72 (Sep. 24, 2015), Colton Loretz

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court concluded that the promissory note, which had security interest by both a deed of trust of Arizona real property and personal guaranties, was governed by Nevada limitations period because of the Nevada choice-of-law provision within the contract. Consequently, the Court held that the party seeking deficiency judgment was time-barred pursuant to NRS 40.455(1) because the judgment was not sought within six months of the foreclosure sale of the collateral property.

Am. First Fed. Credit Union V. Soro, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 73 (Sep. 24, 2014), Katherine Maher

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that a contract clause in which the parties “submit themselves to the jurisdiction of” another state, without more exclusive language, is permissive and does not result in a mandatory forum selection clause.

Foreign Sovereign Immunity- Communist And Socialist Organizations- Effect Of State's System Of Property Ownership On Determination Of Agency Or Instrumentality Status Under The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act Of 1976, Timothy A. Peterson, Harger W. Hoyt

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Application Of The Mail And Wire Fraud Statutes To International Bribery: Questionable Prosecutions Of Questionable Payments, Richard A. Hibey

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

From Orphans To Families In Crisis: Parental Rights Matters In Maine Probate Courts, Deirdre M. Smith

Faculty Publications

This Article examines the sources of the contemporary problems associated with the adjudication of parental rights matters in Maine’s probate courts and identifies specific reforms to address both the structural and substantive law problems. The Article first reviews the development of Maine’s probate courts and their jurisdiction over parental rights matters. It traces the expansion of jurisdiction over children and families from a limited role incidental to the administration of a decedent’s estate to the current scope: a range of matters that may result in the limitation, suspension, or termination of the rights of living parents. Maine probate courts now …

Dean Rusk Award: "Double Jeopardy" On The High Seas: International Narcotics Traffickers Beware, Richard Lee

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Broken System Of Parallel Patent Proceedings: How To Create A Unified, One-Judgment System, Christopher Ilardi

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Child Custody Jurisdiction In Ohio - Implementing The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, Evelyn Leonard Kosicki

Akron Law Review

Reflecting upon the drafters' purposes, this comment will discuss the judicial and legislative ambiguity in Ohio which necessitated legislative change. It will also compare Ohio's child custody litigation prior to the enactment of the U.C.C.J.A. with the results that are likely to be obtained in today's child custody litigation. In addition, it will examine the statutory procedures which now govern child custody litigation and areas of concern which remain to be challenged.

Congressional Power To Grant Federal Courts Jurisdiction Over States: The Impact Of Pennsylvania V. Union Gas, Donald L. Boren

Akron Law Review

Union Gas left many questions unanswered. Suing a state in federal court still remains what one federal judge described as "a wonderland of judicially created and perpetuated fiction and paradox."

The purpose of this article is to examine the impact of Union Gas on states sued in federal court. Part one presents an overview of eleventh amendment jurisprudence. Part two analyzes congressional power to create a cause of action against the states for monetary damages in federal court and examines the impact of Union Gas on the standard for finding congressional intent to abolish states' immunity.

Attorneys' Perspectives On Choice Of Forum In Diversity Cases, Victor E. Flango Ph.D.

Akron Law Review

This report will first outline the arguments relating to proposals to change diversity of citizenship jurisdiction from the perspective of how additional empirical evidence can advance the arguments, and then provide data on lawyers' perceptions of factors that are important in the decision to file in either state or federal court.

Wyoming V. Oklahoma: "[M]Isguided Exercise Of Discretion", Heather N. Sigrist

Akron Law Review

The purpose of this casenote is to analyze the Supreme Court's reasoning in Wyoming v. Oklahoma. Section II of this casenote reiterates background law in the area of standing, exclusive original jurisdiction, and the negative Commerce Clause. Section II (A) recapitulates the doctrine of standing to sue. Section II (B) discusses the Supreme Court's exclusive original jurisdiction. Section II (C) summarizes the negative Commerce Clause. Section III presents the statement of the case. Section IV analyzes the Supreme Court's decision in Wyoming v. Oklahoma.

Section IV (A) criticizes the Court for failing to delineate a solid standing causation analysis. Section …

Person V. Potential: Judicial Struggles To Decide Claims Arising From The Death Of An Embryo Or Fetus And Michigan's Struggle To Settle The Question, Dena M. Marks

Akron Law Review

“Death is well understood; it’s life that isn’t.” We recognize death, but state by state, courts struggle to understand life when called on to determine whether their states’ wrongful death acts apply after the death of an embryo or fetus. These struggles arise because, for the most part, state legislatures have failed to clarify whether a cause of action may be maintained under their wrongful death acts for the death of an embryo or fetus. This failure has lead to inconsistent and unfair results, often allowing the tortfeasor to benefit from causing the greater harm of death, when the tortfeasor …

Supplemental Serendipity: Congress' Accidental Improvement Of Supplemental Jurisdiction, James M. Underwood

Akron Law Review

In this article, I contend that the Supplemental Jurisdiction Statute should be given a plain-language interpretation because the reasons underlying the traditional rules of statutory interpretation are sound, this interpretation actually achieves the desirable goal of enhancing the consistency of federal court jurisprudence in this field, and because such a reading can be done without causing institutional harm and disrupting the business of the federal courts. In short, the Supplemental Jurisdiction Statute is neither broke nor in need of major overhaul or abandonment.

Syngenta, Stephenson And The Federal Judicial Injunctive Power, Lonny Sheinkopf Hoffman

Akron Law Review

In particular, my objectives are three-fold. As regards Syngenta, I will examine the case’s background and procedural history to highlight the strategic decisionmaking and forum shopping decisions made by all of the parties and their lawyers in the contest. Also, by revisiting the Supreme Court’s decision in the case, I hope to offer a better perspective on what the justices did decide and, correspondingly, also reflect on what they did not decide. Even as Syngenta nodded in recognition that some power exists to enjoin state proceedings, its ambit was left undefined. Recognizing the scope of the Court’s decision is critical …

Daimler And The Jurisdictional Triskelion, Zoe Niesel

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.