Jurisdiction Commons^™

Explaining The Supreme Court's Interest In Patent Law, Timothy R. Holbrook

IP Theory

No abstract provided.

Dissenting State Patent Regimes, Camilla A. Hrdy

IP Theory

No abstract provided.

The Political Question Doctrine In Private Military Company Liability Cases: Defining Claims To Ensure Accountability, Joelle D. Keypour

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The note argues that the political question doctrine should be narrowly applied to private military companies (PMCs) to ensure accountability while preserving the separation of powers. It critiques the inconsistent application of the Baker v. Carr six-factor test in PMC cases, which often shields these entities from liability. The proposed solution is a dual classification system for claims—distinguishing between commercial-related and combat-related activities—to provide clarity and prevent abuse of the doctrine. This approach aims to balance judicial oversight with respect for executive authority in sensitive military matters.

Rethinking Legal Globalization: The Case Of Transnational Personal Jurisdiction, Donald Earl Childress Iii

William & Mary Law Review

Under what circumstances may a United States court exercise personal jurisdiction over alien defendants? Courts and commentators have yet to offer a coherent response to this question. That is surprising given that scholars have been calling for the globalization of U.S. law since the late 1980s as part of a transnational litigation narrative.

Through doctrinal and empirical analysis, this Article argues that a U.S. court should have power to exercise personal jurisdiction over an alien defendant not served with process within a state’s borders when (1) the defendant has received constitutionally adequate notice, (2) the state has a constitutionally sufficient …

The Twin Aims Of Erie, Michael S. Green

Faculty Publications

We all remember the twin aims of the Erie rule from first-year civil procedure. A federal court sitting in diversity must use forum state law if it is necessary to avoid 'forum shopping" and the "inequitable administration of the laws." This Article offers a reading of the twin aims and a systematic analysis of their proper role in federal and state court. I argue that the twin aims apply in diversity cases not because they protect state interests, but because they serve the federal purposes standing behind the diversity statute. So understood, they are about separation of powers, not federalism. …

Parens Patriae: A Flawed Strategy For State-Initiated Obesity Litigation, John B. Hoke

William & Mary Law Review

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.

Supplemental Jurisdiction Over Permissive Counterclaims And Set Offs: A Misconception, Douglas D. Mcfarland

Mercer Law Review

In the years prior to 1990, courts extended federal jurisdiction over joined claims and parties in an orderly system. Pendent jurisdiction allowed a plaintiff to join a state law theory of recovery to a federal question theory in the complaint when both arose from a "common nucleus of operative fact."Ancillary jurisdiction allowed a defendant to join a state law claim to a federal claim in a civil action when both arose from the same "transaction or occurrence." Since a compulsory counterclaim arose from the same "transaction or occurrence" and a permissive counterclaim did not, courts had no difficulty in holding …

Personal Jurisdiction And Choice Of Law, Stewart E. Sterk

Articles

The article critiques the Supreme Court's recent personal jurisdiction decisions for failing to provide a clear doctrinal framework, arguing that the Court has oscillated between prioritizing state sovereignty and individual liberty without adequately balancing these interests. The author contends that personal jurisdiction doctrine must evolve to address the complexities of modern, interconnected commerce while protecting both state regulatory power and defendants' reliance interests. The analysis emphasizes the need for a coherent approach that integrates fairness, foreseeability, and sovereign authority in jurisdictional determinations.

Trespassory Union Picketing On Private Property: Sears, Roebuck And Co. V. San Diego County District Council Of Carpenters - Bringing State Law To "No-Man's Land"?, Donald S. Jakubowski, Marni E. Byrum

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Mexican-American Penal Sentences Treaty: A Run-On Sentence, Gary Gray

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.

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 …

The Invalidation Of Mandatory Cable Access Regulations: Fcc V. Midwest Video Corp., Robert L. Clarkson

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Muko And Conex: The Third Circuit Responds To Connell , Robert A. King, Melvin L. Moser

Pepperdine Law Review

The authors discuss the application of federal antitrust laws to organized labor. The article, written for practitioners, defines the elements necessary to obtain a recovery in labor antitrust actions. The authors analyze the standard of review, burden of proof and the elements which the unions must show in order to be exempted from antitrust law. The focal point of the article is the comparison between the Supreme Court's most recent discussion of the labor exemption in Connell Construction Co. v. Plumbers & Steamfitters Local Union 100 and the Third Circuit's application of that exemption in Larry V. Muko v. Southwestern …

A Reappraisal Of General And Limited Jurisdiction In California , Thomas Kallay

Pepperdine Law Review

The ability of a California court to assert jurisdiction over business enterprises currently depends upon how the court characterizes the nature and extent of the business's activities within the state. If the in-state business activities of a particular concern are extensive, California courts will exercise all-encompassing general jurisdiction over the cause of action, but if the activities are insufficient to warrant the exercise of general jurisdiction, which has been invariably the case, the court will then turn to a consideration of limited jurisdiction, which jurisdiction depends upon the quality and nature of the business's activities in the forum in relation …

Aviation Litigation: Federal Preemption And The Creation Of A Federal Remedy As A Means To Extinguish The Current Confusion In The Courts, Deborah J. Olsen

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court Continues Its Journey Down The Ever Narrowing Paths Of Section 1983 And The Due Process Clause: An Analysis Of Parratt V. Taylor, Robert E. Palmer

Pepperdine Law Review

After nearly a century of quiet slumber, the Supreme Court awoke the sleeping giant. In the past two decades, 42 U.S.C. §1983 has evolved into a judicial Frankenstein monster. Unable to control the beast, the Court has attempted to restrict the creature's movements by unnecessarily limiting its constitutional source. If followed to its logical conclusion, the Court's narrow reading of the Constitution may ultimately demote all due process violations to state tort remedies. This note traces the legislative and judicial evolution of section 1983 as well as the statute's present interaction with the due process clause. The vehicle for this …