Jurisprudence Commons^™

Beyond Principal-Agent Theories: Law And The Judicial Hierarchy, Pauline T. Kim

Northwestern University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Arbitration - Arbitrability Of Antitrust Claims Arising From An International Commercial Contract - Mitsubishi Motors Corp. V. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., 105 S. Ct. 3346 (1985)., William L. Blagg

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Impact Of Third Preference Status (Professionals) On Immigrants As Created By The 1965 Amendment To The Immigration And Nationality Act - Retraction Of Expansion Of Degree Equivalency - Matter Of Portugues Do Atlantico Information Bureau, Inc., Debra A. Egger

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The European Commission's Ecs/Akzo Standard For Predatory Pricing In The E.E.C.: Deterrence Or Disorder?, Thomas G. Ehr

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Immigration - Due Process - The Availability Of Constitutional Safeguards To Detained Cuban Aliens, Garcia-Mir V. Meese, 788 F.2d 1446 (11th Cir. 1986), Cert. Denied, 107 S. Ct. 289 (1986)., Elizabeth G. Marlowe

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

A Typology Of Judging Styles, Corey Rayburn Yung

Northwestern University Law Review

This Article calls into question the fundamental premises of models of judicial decisionmaking utilized by legal and political science scholars. In the place of the predominant theories, I offer a new approach to understanding judicial behavior which recognizes judicial heterogeneity, multidimensional behavior, and interconnectedness among judges at different levels within the judiciary. The study utilizes a unique dataset of over 30,000 judicial votes from eleven courts of appeals in 2008, yielding statistically independent measures for judicial activism, ideology, independence, and partisanship. Based upon those four metrics, statistical cluster analysis is used to identify nine statistically distinct judging styles: Trailblazing, Consensus …

Trial By Google: Judicial Notice In The Information Age, Jeffrey Bellin, Andrew Guthrie Ferguson

Northwestern University Law Review

This Article presents a theory of judicial notice for the information age. It argues that the ease of accessing factual data on the Internet allows judges and litigants to expand the use of judicial notice in ways that raise significant concerns about admissibility, reliability, and fair process. State and federal courts are already applying the surprisingly pliant judicial notice rules to bring websites ranging from Google Maps to Wikipedia into the courtroom, and these decisions will only increase in frequency in coming years. This rapidly emerging judicial phenomenon is notable for its ad hoc and conclusory nature—attributes that have the …

Spokeo V. Robins And The Constitutional Foundations Of Statutory Standing, Maxwell Stearns

Faculty Scholarship

In Spokeo v. Robins, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to address the following question: Does Congress have the power to confer standing upon an individual claiming that a privately owned website violated its federal statutory obligation to take specified steps designed to promote accuracy in aggregating and reporting his personal and financial data even if the resulting false disclosures did not produce concrete harm? This somewhat arcane standing issue involves congressional power to broaden the scope of the first of three constitutional standing requirements: injury in fact, causation, and redressability. Although the case does not directly address the prudential …

Reddall V. Bryan And The Role Of State Law In Federal Eminent Domain Jurisprudence, Shannon Frede

Legal History Publications

Prior to 1875, the standard federal takings procedure had been for state governments to condemn property on behalf of the federal government. As a result, the majority of interpretative work in the early history of eminent domain jurisprudence was undertaken by state courts. In 1853, the Maryland General Assembly granted the United States Government the power to condemn land in Maryland for an aqueduct across the Potomac to supply water to two District cities. In Reddall v. Bryan, the Maryland Court of Appeals upheld the aqueduct supplying the city of Washington with water as a public use. The Court …

The Liabilities Of Sureties, Daniel P. Cipollone

Osgoode Legal Studies Research Paper Series

This paper provides an overview of when a surety may be released from his or her obligations under a guarantee following a material variation to the principal lending contract. Part I frames the overall discussion by reviewing the role and importance of guarantees in contemporary commerce, outlining the central tenets of guarantee obligations, and distinguishing them as a subset of indemnities. Part II reviews how sureties have traditionally enjoyed a favoured status at law as well as what, in law, is considered to constitute a material variation. Part III introduces and sets out a longstanding rule governing the liability of …

Prosecuting Generals For War Crimes The Shifting Sands Of Accomplice Liability In International Criminal Law, Mark A. Summers

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

An Eighth Amendment Analysis Of Statutes Allowing Or Mandating Transfer Of Juvenile Offenders To Adult Criminal Court In Light Of The Supreme Court's Recent Jurisprudence Recognizing Developmental Neuroscience, Katherine I. Puzone

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Surprising Acquittals In The Gotovina And Perisic Cases: Is The Icty Appeals Chamber A Trial Chamber In Sheep's Clothing, Mark A. Summers

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Are Physician-Patient Communications Protected By The First Amendment?, Martha Swartz

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

In the past several years, a number of states have enacted laws restricting physicians’ rights to speak freely with their patients. These laws go beyond informed consent laws enacted in most states in the 1960s and 1970s. While the informed consent laws require physicians to provide certain categories of information to patients prior to invasive treatment—such as the nature of the risks and benefits entailed—these new laws either prohibit physicians from discussing certain topics or mandate that they provide specific information to their patients that is only questionably supported by medical evidence. In the past several years, a number of …

Restoring The Fact/Law Distinction In Patent Claim Construction, Jonas Anderson, Peter Menell

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in Teva Pharmaceuticals v. Sandoz brings the standard of review of patent construction rulings into line with foundational juridical principles of appellate review, resolving one of the most divisive issues in patent litigation over the past two decades. This article shows that the decision's efficacy depends critically upon how district courts adapt their case management. District judges will need to implement effective procedures for ferreting out subsidiary factual disputes bearing on claim construction, scour the intrinsic evidence for contraindications, develop a sufficient evidentiary record for resolving the dispute, and explain their analysis. The article also …

All Together Now: Using Principles Of Group Dynamics To Train Better Jurors, Sara Gordon

Scholarly Works

We ask juries to make important decisions that have a profound impact on people’s lives. We leave these decisions in the hands of groups of laypeople because we hope that the diverse range of experiences and knowledge in the group will lead to more thoughtful and informed decisionmaking. Studies suggest that diverse groups of jurors have different perspectives on evidence, engage in more thorough debate, and more closely evaluate facts. At the same time, there are a variety of problems associated with group decisionmaking, from the loss of individual motivation in group settings, to the vulnerability of groups to various …

A Rhetorician’S Practical Wisdom, Linda L. Berger

Scholarly Works

For three years, I had the great good fortune to work in the office next to Jack Sammons. My good fortune extended to a coincidence of timing that allowed me to work with Jack on a co-authored article, The Law's Mystery. During the time I worked next door, I felt cursed by an inability to grasp concepts that to Jack appeared inevitable and essential, whether those inevitabilities and essences were to be found within the law, good lawyering, or good legal education. The curse persisted throughout the writing of The Law's Mystery.

For Jack, the essence of a …

The Keyes To Reclaiming The Racial History Of The Roberts Court, Tom I. Romero Ii

Scholarly Works

This Article advocates for a fundamental re-understanding about the way that the history of race is understood by the current Supreme Court. Represented by the racial rights opinions of Justice John Roberts that celebrate racial progress, the Supreme Court has equivocated and rendered obsolete the historical experiences of people of color in the United States. This jurisprudence has in turn reified the notion of color-blindness, consigning racial discrimination to a distant and discredited past that has little bearing to how race and inequality is experienced today.

The racial history of the Roberts Court is centrally informed by the context and …

Initial Reflections On An Interdisciplinary Approach To Rule Of Law Studies, Aparna Polavarapu, Joel Samuels

Scholarly Works

In this essay, we attempt to lay the initial groundwork for a clearer understanding of rule of law both as a concept and as a distinct field. We respond to the assertions that the rule of law field is non-existent or incoherent, and assert that a field of rule of law is not impossible to ascertain. First, we survey how rule of law - as both a term and a state of political being - is understood by practitioners and scholars, as well as how scholars reconcile the lack of a clear, widely universal understanding of the concept of rule …

Two Dogmas Of Originalism, Ian C. Bartrum

Scholarly Works

In the early 1950s, Willlard Quine’s Two Dogmas of Empiricism offered a devastating critique of logical positivism and the effort to distinguish “science” from “metaphysics.” Quine demonstrated that the positivists relied on dogmatic oversimplifications of both the world and human practices, and, in the end, suggested that our holistic natural experience cannot be reduced to purely logical explanations. In this piece, I argue that constitutional originalism—which, too, seeks to define a constitutional “science”—relies on similar dogmatisms. In particular, I contend that the “fixation thesis,” which claims that the constitutional judge’s first task is to fix the text’s semantic meaning at …