Jurisprudence Commons^™

Equal Protection; State Alimony Statutes; Sex Discrimination; Orr V. Orr, David A. Detec, Jane L. Thomas-Moore

Akron Law Review

In Orr v. Orr the United States Supreme Court held unconstitutional the Alabama alimony statutes which provided that husbands, but not wives, may be required to pay alimony upon divorce. The Court's principal reason for so holding was the statutes' violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the fourteenth amendment on the basis of sex discrimination.

Liability Of Liquor Vendors For Injuries To Intoxicated Persons, Kemock V. Mark Ii, Elinore Marsh

Akron Law Review

In an opinion anticipating, in part, the advent of the comparative negligence standard in Ohio, Kemock v. Mark II extends common law liability to include liquor vendors who serve already intoxicated patrons who injure themselves and whose injury is the proximate result of continued alcohol consumption. Relying upon an earlier Ohio Supreme Court decision and a California Supreme Court case, the Court of Appeals of Ohio recognizes liability for vendor negligence which damages the drinker. The test for recovery is one not previously applied in cases of this sort in Ohio; one which measures liability by balancing degrees of each …

Sixth Amendment; Right To Counsel; Multiple Representation; Cuyler V. Sullivan, Howard S. Essner

Akron Law Review

In Cuyler v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court finally resolved two important issues in the areas of criminal law and the sixth amendment right to counsel. In this case, the Court is faced with a situation with which it has dealt but twice before: joint representation of criminal defendants. Cuyler represents the culmination of the legal inquiry into the problems inherent whenever a single attorney represents more than one defendant in a criminal proceeding.

Sixth Amendment; Right To Counsel; Use Of Prior Uncounseled Convictions; Lewis V. United States And Baldasar V. Illinois, Rita Marks

Akron Law Review

Once again the Supreme Court has spoken on the issue of the right to counsel. Within three months the Court rendered two decisions which appear to be inconsistent, not only with one another, but with prior decisions of the Court

Refusals To Deal By Monopolists - Recent Decisions, Thomas J. Collin

Akron Law Review

This article will review and evaluate these recent principal cases, both judicial and administrative, in which single-firm refusals to deal by monopolists have been challenged under section 2 of the Sherman Act or, by analogy, under section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. It will demonstrate that there is no reason to depart from conventional monopolization analysis in deciding these cases.

The Waiver Of Juvenile Court Jurisdiction; State V. Adams, Antonia Johnson

Akron Law Review

Since Illinois created the first juvenile court system by statute in 1899, every state has enacted a juvenile justice system philosophically designed to help rather than to punish children who violate the law. The juvenile court from its inception has advocated the protection of misbehaving children from the harsh retributive philosophy of the adult criminal law. Instead of punishment it has attempted to provide methods by which to assist them to develop into mature, responsible adults.

Yet, from its inception, the proponents of the separate, specialized juvenile justice system have presumed that some children would not respond positively to its …

Constitutional Amendment; Rescission Of Ratification; Extension Of Ratification Period, State Of Idaho V. Freeman, John Carrol

Akron Law Review

The court's ruling in Freeman is in conflict with both the Supreme Court's apparent trend involving article V issues, and most of the recent scholarly opinion on point. As a result of this departure, and the fact that the ERA failed to be adopted, this decision is likely to have slight precedential value. Nonetheless, the district court's discussion of the ERA in light of recent changes in the political question doctrine has significance in interpreting article V.

Response To Professor Parness And Mr. Reagle, Jack Grant Day

Akron Law Review

I subscribe to so much of the reform suggestions proposed by the authors that I believe my response can be most useful if confined to some emphasis or expansion of concurrent views, specific reference to disagreements and support for points of reform needed but not recommended.

Symposium: Intermediate Appellate Court Practice - Problems And Solutions, Samuel H. Bell

Akron Law Review

Following these brief words of introduction is presented a collage of individual opinion - mounted, framed and presented as a reflection upon the state of today's appellate process as well as upon various problems and solutions involved therein

Occupational Safety And Health Act, Industrial Union V. American Petroleum Institute, Patrick M. Vitone

Akron Law Review

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration [hereinafter cited as OSHA] was created pursuant to Title 29 of the United States Code, to define the terms of this battle. In Industrial Union v. American Petroleum Institute, the federal judiciary has taken a hand at making these terms somewhat more clear. It is the object of this casenote to analyze the impact of the Industrial Union decision on the regulatory processes of OSHA, a task which involves a synthesis of the plurality, concurring and dissenting opinions.

Legal Issues Presented By Motor Vehicle Restraint Systems, Gary C. Fredenburg

Akron Law Review

In response to this problem, Congress enacted the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 19668 for the sole purpose of "reduc[ing] traffic accidents and deaths and injuries to persons resulting from traffic accidents." Since its inception in 1968, the United States National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has placed heavy emphasis on increasing the use of occupant restraint systems. In addition, the states have taken an active role in attempting to encourage, and in some instances mandate, the use of restraint devices. This comment will examine the various means employed by each in attempting to increase the driving …

Patent Law Reform Via The Federal Courts Improvement Act Of 1982: The Transformation Of Patentability Jurisprudence, Timothy J. O'Hearn

Akron Law Review

The Federal Courts Improvement Act was signed into law on April 2, 1982. Set for an effective date of October 1, 1982, the result of this enactment has been the merger of the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals and the Court of Claims into a new appellate federal court: the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Unlike most appellate courts, the jurisdiction of the new Federal Circuit is determined primarily by subject matter, rather than geography. As a result, this change in the federal judiciary will be felt directly in only a few special legal subject areas. Among …

Shareholder Liability In Ohio: Confounding Attorneys And Others, South High Development Limited V. Weiner, Lippe & Cromley Co., L.P.A., Timothy J. O'Hearn

Akron Law Review

The purpose of this article is to explore the soundness and ramifications of South High Development Limited v. Weiner, Lippe & Cromley Co., L.P.A. To begin, the case holding will be summarized and the history of professional corporations reviewed. Special emphasis will be placed on Ohio legal professional corporations. A critique of the court's rationale and analysis of its implications will then follow.

Escobedo And Miranda Revisited, Arthur J. Goldberg

Akron Law Review

Shortly before the close of the 1983 term, the Supreme Court of the United States decided two cases, U.S. v. Gouveia and New York v. Quarles, which in effect overruled Escobedo v. Illinois and undermined Miranda v. Arizona.

Uninsured Motorist Insurance Now Covers Punitive Award - Hutchinson V. J.C. Penny Casualty Insurance Company, Dale Katzenmeyer

Akron Law Review

A split of authority exists among the few states which have decided the issue In jurisdictions permitting recovery of punitive damages, uninsured motorist coverage is intended to place the insurer in the shoes of the uninsured tortfeasor. Since the insurer stands in the shoes of the tortfeasor, and since punitive damages could be covered if the tortfeasor had his own insurance, it is illogical to deny the victim punitive damages simply because the tortfeasor is uninsured. Other jurisdictions believe that punitive damages should not be awarded since that award would not operate to punish the tortfeasor and would therefore violate …

Meritor Savings Bank V. Vinson: The Supreme Court's Recognition Of The Hostile Environment In Sexual Harassment Claims, Victoria T. Bartels

Akron Law Review

This casenote will examine Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson in light of the brief legal history of Title VII sexual harassment claims and will consider the implications of both the Court's holding and its dicta regarding the undecided issues.

The New Workers' Compensatin Law In Ohio: Senate Bill 307 Was No Accident, Scott Washam

Akron Law Review

In Part I, this comment traces the evolution of workers' compensation laws in this country with particular emphasis on the development of the Act in Ohio. In Part II, the relevant caselaw is discussed, including Blankenship v. Cincinnati Milacron Chemicals, Jones v. VIP Development Company, and their progeny which led to the enactment of Senate Bill 307. In Part III, Bill 30710 is considered along with its implications for the injured worker.

Employment At Will In Ohio: Working From Within, Brian Wilson

Akron Law Review

This comment seeks to measure the parameters of Ohio's exceptions to the at-will rule in relation to other states' views on this issue. Also included is an examination of the interplay between the legislature and the judiciary in affecting change in Ohio. A proposal designed to "solidify" the public policy exception to the at-will rule after Phung v. Waste Management, Inc., a recent Ohio Supreme Court case, will also be presented.

Title Vii: Legal Protection Against Sexual Harassment, Arthur J. Marinelli Jr.

Akron Law Review

The purpose of this article is to examine early case law and recent court decisions involving sexual harassment, especially Meritor v. Vinson. The article will discuss employer avoidance of liability under the EEOC guidelines and will urge employers to implement steps to investigate, prohibit, and sensitize supervisors to sexual harassment.

Nonbank Banks: A Bank Is Always A Bank Unless Of Course It Is A Nonbank Bank: Board Of Governors V. Dimension Financial Corporation, Joseph Reece

Akron Law Review

Board of Governors v. Dimension Financial Corporation is of major significance because it is the first Supreme Court case addressing the issue of whether "nonbank banks" should be regulated under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (BHCA). In rendering the Dimension Financial decision, the Supreme Court may have taken a major step in diffusing the controversy between financial institutions, the Federal Reserve Board, and Congress by determining when a bank is a "bank" for purposes of regulation under the BHCA.

In analyzing the issue before it, the Dimension Court reviewed applicable statutes, relevant case law, and legislative history and …