Jurisprudence Commons^™

United States V. Moore: Aids And The Criminal Law: The Witch Hunt Begins, Robert Louis Stauter Md., J.D.

Akron Law Review

The United States v. Moore opinions written by Federal District Judge Diana E. Murphy and Circuit Judge Timbers reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of the disease process of AIDS. The purpose of this article is to help the reader critically analyze these court opinions. To facilitate this discussion the article will first provide the reader with some very basic, yet very technical, vocabulary used by medical specialists who care for and study patients with AIDS.

United States V. Markham: The Attack On The Drug War Becomes An Attack On The Fourth Amendment, Lee A. Schaffer

Akron Law Review

In United States v. Markham, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit expanded the exception even further when it upheld the validity of a warrantless search of a mobile home parked in a private residential driveway.

This casenote will review the history behind the fourth amendment's warrant requirement and the development of the automobile exception. Next, it will examine the Supreme Court's decision in Carney to evaluate the sixth circuit's application of the automobile exception in Markham, and the court's ruling that a warrantless search and seizure of a motor home parked in the driveway …

State V. Sorenson: The Adequacy Of The Residual Exceptions In Child Sexual Abuse Cases: Five-Part Test Puts An End To The Criticism, Robert G. Renis

Akron Law Review

In State v. Sorenson, a seven-year-old girl's father and uncle had sexual intercourse with her. The court allowed a social worker to testify as to what the girl had told her. Finally, a court has set forth a detailed test for use in determining the admissibility of hearsay evidence in child sexual abuse cases. This casenote will analyze the court's five-part test, and discuss how it was applied in Sorenson. The casenote will then compare the Sorenson test (used in conjunction with the residual exceptions) to statutes providing for specific hearsay exceptions in child sexual abuse cases.

State Regulation Of Worker Safety In The Nuclear Industry: The Impact Of Goodyear Atomic Corp. V. Miller, Donald A. Mihokovich

Akron Law Review

This casenote will discuss the effect of Goodyear Atomic Corp. v. Miller on federal preemption in the nuclear industry. This decision does not mark federal preemption's demise. Preemption will continue in areas involving protection of the public from the dangers of radioactivity. Nevertheless, this decision may have an adverse effect on the private sector's continuing involvement in the nuclear industry, an involvement that is essential for both national energy policy and national defense.

Welsh V. United States, The Sixth Circuit Gives A Physics Lesson - For Every Action There Is An Equal And Opposite Reaction, Daniel L. Bell

Akron Law Review

This casenote will review the facts of Welsh v. United States and present the current judicial approaches to spoliation of evidence in civil litigation. Second, the note will analyze the Welsh court's proposed solution to the spoliation problem. Finally, the note will discuss the use of the Welsh approach in litigation and management implications for health care facilities.

Kuhlmeier V. Hazelwood School District: The First Amendment Rights Of Public High School Students, Edward S. Muse

Akron Law Review

In Kuhlmeier v. Hazelwood School District, the Supreme Court held that high school students' first amendment rights were not violated when their principal deleted articles from the school newspaper. The Court stated that the school newspaper was not a "public forum" for expression which normally receives full first amendment protection. The Court further held that the school principal did not violate students' first amendment rights when he restricted the printing of articles due to the effect that they could have on other students.

The Supreme Court's decision will undoubtedly curtail students' rights to free speech and press. This casenote …

Chalk V. United States District Court Central District Of California: A Major Victory For Aids Employees Under The Federal Rehabilitation Act Of 1973, Janet A. Michael

Akron Law Review

This note will first review the facts of Chalk v. United States District Court Central District of California and will present a broad overview of AIDS, outlining current medical knowledge of the disease. Second, this note will analyze the Rehabilitation Act, examining regulations, legislative history, and case law interpreting the Act. Finally, this note will analyze the impact of Chalk on future employment cases.

San Francisco Art & Athletics, Inc. V. United States Olympic Committee: Usoc May Enforce Its Rights In Olympic Without Proof Of Confusion, Charles F. Hauff Jr.

Akron Law Review

In San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. v. United States Olympic Committee, the United States Supreme Court held that the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) could enforce its statutory rights in the mark OLYMPIC without proving likelihood of customer confusion. Because this holding extended the USOC's trademark rights beyond those engendered by the Lanham Act, the Court was compelled to subject those rights to constitutional scrutiny. The Court's holding prevented San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. (SFAA) from using the word OLYMPIC to promote the "Gay Olympic Games."

The SFAA decision will probably affect future analyses of trademark rights …

Evidentiary Use Of Prior Acquittals: When Analysis Exceeds Reality, Paul Harper

Akron Law Review

The purpose of this note is to assess the basis and propriety of that decision and to highlight some potential problems with the Court's conclusion. Additionally, this casenote will attempt to envision how this holding may affect future prosecutions.

Finally it will offer an alternative model which may more adequately address the tension between the government's legitimate prosecutorial interests and the defendant's interest in finality of judgment.

In Re Adoption Of Charles B. - A Tough Act To Follow, Deborah M. Arik

Akron Law Review

This Note first discusses homosexuality and examines Ohio's position on adoption, child custody, and custody disputes involving homosexual parents." The Note then reviews other states' positions on homosexual adoption. The remainder of the Note analyzes the Charles B. decisions" and discusses future questions that the Court will need to answer."

Milkovich Vs. Lorain Journal Co.: Is The Supreme Court "Holding The Balance True" In Defamation Actions?, Sheila Noonan

Akron Law Review

This Note examines the background of defamation law and the Milkovich court's reasoning. The Note will discuss the Milkovich test's ability to distinguish fact from opinion and its potential future impact on broadcasters and journalists in the United States.

Holland V. Illinois: Sixth Amendment Fair Cross-Section Requirement Does Not Preclude Racially-Based Peremptory Challenges, Debra L. Dippel

Akron Law Review

This note recaps the Supreme Court's previous decisions regarding defendant's objections to jury composition, including both equal protection and fair cross-section requirement analyses. It also discusses Holland, examines the various opinions in the case, and reviews the arguments for and against abolishing peremptory challenges. Finally, the note proposes a solution for the questions which Holland leaves unanswered.

Idaho V. Wright: Who Can Speak For The Children Now?, Laura Barker

Akron Law Review

This note discusses how the Court reached the decision in Idaho v. Wright to exclude the hearsay testimony of a child abuse victim. The note examines the Court's reasoning and the effects which the exclusion of hearsay testimony of child abuse victims may have on future prosecutions. The note concludes that the Court's decision is likely to add chaos into the already difficult and complex arena of child abuse prosecution.

Mugwump, Mediator, Machiavellian, Or Majority? The Role Of Justice O'Connor In The Affirmative Action Cases, Thomas R. Haggard

Akron Law Review

The purpose of this article is to provide a critical analysis of Justice O'Connor's affirmative action opinions. It will show that while her early record provides justification for all three characterizations, her more recent decisions suggest the emergency of a more favorable image. Her opinions in Croson and Media Broadcasting reflect the realization that a narrow, hair-splitting approach to this critical social and constitutional crisis will do little to hasten its resolution; that there is apparently no form of affirmative action that the liberal wing of the Court is unwilling to endorse, making her consensus by compromise approach a futile …

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.

Civil Rights In The 1990'S: Non-Discrimination Or Quotas?, Donald B. Ayer

Akron Law Review

I would like today to offer some thoughts on the way that we as a country have handled the issue of reverse discrimination as a means of pursuing equal opportunity.

My first observation is that there is an undeniable tension between competing approaches to racial and gender justice that have been advanced and pursued in recent years. I take as my starting point the fundamental principle embodied in the Equal Protection Clause (as well as the Declaration of Independence), that, as the elder Justice Harlan said in dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson,' the Constitution is colorblind, and does not allow …

Nonpayment Of Taxes: When Ignorance Of The Law Is An Excuse, Jon Strauss

Akron Law Review

"Ignorance of the law is no excuse" is a well-known saying regarding criminal law. Yet the 1991 Supreme Court decision of Cheek v. United States held that a defendant's ignorance of the federal tax laws is an excuse to the crime of nonpayment of income taxes. This paper reviews the history of the defense of ignorance of the law in tax crimes, discusses the philosophical ramifications of this defense, and examines the extent to which the Supreme Court's allowance of this defense is appropriate.

The Search For The Fourth Amendment Seizure: It Won't Be Found On A Bus - Florida V. Bostick, James Spallino Jr.

Akron Law Review

The Florida v. Bostick decision raises important Fourth Amendment questions regarding police encounters with citizens.

Part I of this Note discusses the development of the legal standard used for determining when a consensual encounter results in an impermissible seizure. Part II reviews the Bostick decision. Part III analyzes the impact of the Bostick decision. This section argues that: (1) the status of the legal standard to be used in consensual encounter cases is now uncertain as a result of the Court's holding; (2) the Court sent a strong message to individuals and the law enforcement community by refusing to decide …

Eastern Airlines V. Floyd: Airline Passengers Denied Recovery For Emotional Distress Under The Warsaw Convention, Lisa M. Fromm

Akron Law Review

This Note reviews prior district court and appellate court decisions regarding the translation and scope of "bodily injury." Next, the Note discusses the Court's analysis in Floyd, including the arguments for and against allowing recovery for emotional distress under the Warsaw Convention. Finally, the Note examines the ramifications of the Floyd Court's interpretation and the uncertainties which remain in this area of the law.

United Auto Workers V. Johnson Controls, Inc.: One Small Step For Womankind, A. L. Cherry

Akron Law Review

In United Auto Workers v. Johnson Controls, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court was faced with the task of deciding whether women's childbearing capacity could be used to limit women's job choices and opportunities within certain industrial/ manufacturing fields. The Court decided that the ability to bear children could be used to so limit women, but only if the employer met a high standard. In Johnson Controls, employees who worked in a toxic work environment sought a determination that their employer's fetal protection policy discriminated on the basis of sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act …