Litigation Commons^™

Due Process Shaped By The Present Instead Of The Past: The Needed Reinvigoration Of A Lawrence Vision Of Due Process, Azor Cole

Seattle University Law Review

The recognition of unenumerated rights, rights implied from the text of the constitution, is a political battlefield waged through law with profound implications for all Americans. Generally, there have been two prongs for an inquiry into an unenumerated constitutional right under the Fourteenth Amendment. One is to ask whether the right to be found is objectively deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition. The other is to ask whether the right to be found is fundamental to this Nation’s scheme of ordered liberty. The current Supreme Court has effectively done away with this present-day liberty analysis, saying it is …

Sneakers, The Shoes That Talk The Talk And Walk The Walk: How Jack Daniel’S Properties, Inc. V. Vip Products Left Its Footprint On Trademark Law And The Sneaker Industry, Nitya Tolani

Seattle University Law Review

As the fashion industry—including the sneaker industry housed within it—continues to go through the motions of collectively flocking out, and then collectively flocking again to the newest innovations in the world of wearables, the landscape of laws to protect and promote those innovations expands as well, mainly in the area of intellectual property law. Although copyright, trademark, and patent law can cover innovations in the fashion industry, this Note centers its analysis on trademark law. Trademark law has been through notable change in recent years because of the United States Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. …

Prejudice Standards In Washington’S Appellate Courts, Andrew B. Van Winkle

Seattle University Law Review

When an appellate court finds an error to have occurred during a proceeding, the error is not yet subject to correction. In order to merit a remedy, the error must have been sufficiently prejudicial to the aggrieved party’s case. Drawing the line between correctable and non-correctable errors is not an easy task, for it often requires guessing at what was in the minds of jurors and trial judges. To cope with this task, courts have devised various rules and tests for deciding whether an error was likely prejudicial or not. These standards often go by names such as “harmless error,” …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Brief Of Amici Curiae Corporate And Securities Law Experts: Central Maine Power Company V. Maine Commission On Government Ethics And Election Practices, Sarah C. Haan

Scholarly Articles

Amici submit this brief to share expertise on corporate governance and securities laws and practices that relate directly to the lower court’s narrow-tailoring analysis of the Maine statute at the center of this case. While all participating amici may not agree with every statement in the brief, all amici agree that the Act’s 5% equity ownership threshold is not arbitrary and that ownership of 5% or more of a U.S. entity’s equity by a foreign government or a foreign-government-influenced entity presents a foreign influence on the U.S. entity’s governance and decision-making.

Chatgpt Wrote This Title: Redefining “Human” Authorship, The Continuation Of The Black Box Problem, Deepfakes, And Ai-Generated Content Liability, Shannon Macdonald

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

The State Giveth, The State Taketh Away: State Law, Local Housing Production, And The Right To Appeal, Gary Deyoung

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Pushback On Zoom® Court Proceedings: Is “Effective” Counsel Still Effective?, Adrianne Downey

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Employment Law—Blurred Lines: Loopholes To Avoid Joint Employer Liability—Felder V. United States Tennis Ass'n, 27 F.4th 834 (2d Cir. 2022), Katie Groves

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Civil Law—Circuit Split: Eighth Circuit’S Superior Causation Standard For Anti-Kickback Violations Under The False Claims Act—United States Ex Rel. Cairns V. D.S. Med. Llc., 42 F.4th 828 (8th Cir. 2022), Lauren Flynn

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Editor's Note, Catherine Treseler

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Collateral Consequences Of Conviction: The Current Inequality In Courts’ Consideration Of The“Side Effects” Of Federal Sentencing, Olivia Johnnene

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Internet Law—Willful Ignorance Is Bliss For Media Conglomerates When It Comes To Sex Trafficking—Does V. Reddit, Inc., 51 F.4th 1137 (9th Cir. 2022), Zoe Lyon

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law—Sms Mess: Circuits Disagree On Article Iii Standing For Claim Under Telephone Consumer Protection Act—Cross V. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. Civ. 1:20- Cv-01047, 2022 U.S. Dist. Lexis 10676 (W.D. Ark. Jan. 20, 2022), Molly Lane

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Is You Is Or Is You Ain’T My Client? Navigating The Mysteries Of Prospective And Organizational Representation, Leonard Niehoff

Articles

Many years ago, I was trying a civil case that had stretched on for weeks in a federal court in Detroit. The counsel tables for both parties were covered with briefs, coffee cups, memoranda, books, water pitchers, examination outlines, yellow writing pads, and all the other litter that inevitably piles up during long trials. It appeared that we had moved in, just as at our actual homes it appeared that we had moved out.

Judicial-Ish Efficiency: An Analysis Of Alternative Dispute Resolution Programs In Delaware Superior Court, Jordan Hicks

Washington and Lee Law Review

Since the late twentieth century, federal and state jurisdictions across the United States have explored the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (“ADR”) programs to resolve legal disputes. ADR programs provide extrajudicial mechanisms through which parties can resolve their disputes without the delay and expense of a traditional judicial proceeding. Courts and practitioners alike have lauded ADR programs. For litigators, ADR programs are a way to deliver outcomes to clients quickly and efficiently. For courts, ADR programs are a way to remove cases from overcrowded dockets.

While ADR is generally considered to be speedier and more cost-efficient than a trial, little …

A Comparative Analysis Of Third-Party Litigation Funding In The United States And The United Kingdom, Gary Myers

Faculty Publications

Third-Party Litigation Funding (TPLF), which is also known as litigation finance, involves a financial arrangement in which a third party provides funding to support the plaintiff's pursuit of a civil lawsuit. The third party, in return, receives a portion of the proceeds if the litigation is successful. Like a contingent fee agreement, this type funding model enables a party to bring a lawsuit even if it does not have the resources to pay the up-front costs of the litigation. The important difference is that the litigation funder is not counsel to a party in the case, and that TPLF essentially …

The Need For Corporate Guardrails In U.S. Industrial Policy, Lenore Palladino

Seattle University Law Review

U.S. politicians are actively “marketcrafting”: the passage of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the CHIPS and Science Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act collectively mark a new moment of robust industrial policy. However, these policies are necessarily layered on top of decades of shareholder primacy in corporate governance, in which corporate and financial leaders have prioritized using corporate profits to increase the wealth of shareholders. The Administration and Congress have an opportunity to use industrial policy to encourage a broader reorientation of U.S. businesses away from extractive shareholder primacy and toward innovation and productivity. This Article examines discrete opportunities within the …

Securities Regulation And Administrative Deference In The Roberts Court, Eric C. Chaffee

Seattle University Law Review

In A History of Securities Law in the Supreme Court, A.C. Pritchard and Robert B. Thompson write, “Securities law offers an illuminating window into the Supreme Court’s administrative law jurisprudence over the last century. The securities cases provide one of the most accessible illustrations of key transitions of American law.” A main reason for this is that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is a bellwether among administrative agencies, and as a result, A History of Securities Law in the Supreme Court is a history of administrative law in the Supreme Court of the United States as well.

Delegated Corporate Voting And The Deliberative Franchise, Sarah C. Haan

Seattle University Law Review

Starting in the 1930s with the earliest version of the proxy rules, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has gradually increased the proportion of “instructed” votes on the shareholder’s proxy card until, for the first time in 2022, it required a fully instructed proxy card. This evolution effectively shifted the exercise of the shareholder’s vote from the shareholders’ meeting to the vote delegation that occurs when the share-holder fills out the proxy card. The point in the electoral process when the binding voting choice is communicated is now the execution of the proxy card (assuming the shareholder completes the card …