Out Of The Quandary: Personal Jurisdiction Over Absent Class Member Claims Explained,
2019
William & Mary Law School
Out Of The Quandary: Personal Jurisdiction Over Absent Class Member Claims Explained, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
Since the Supreme Court's decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County, litigants and lower courts have wrestled with the issue of whether a federal court must be able to exercise personal jurisdiction with respect to each of the claims asserted by absent class members in a class action and, if so, what standard governs that jurisdictional determination. This issue is rapidly coming to a head and is poised for inevitable resolution by the Supreme Court in the near future; multiple circuit courts have heard appeals from district courts that have reached varying conclusions on …
Table Of Contents,
2019
Seattle University School of Law
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Professor Anthony J. Santoro Business Law Lecture Series Presents Becoming A Valued Business Lawyer,
2019
Roger Williams University School of Law
The Professor Anthony J. Santoro Business Law Lecture Series Presents Becoming A Valued Business Lawyer, Roger Williams University School Of Law, Michael M. Bowden
School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events
No abstract provided.
Internet Intermediary Liability In Defamation,
2019
University of Calgary
Internet Intermediary Liability In Defamation, Emily B. Laidlaw, Hilary Young
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
Given the broad meaning of publication in defamation law, internet intermediaries such as internet service providers, search engines, and social media companies may be liable for defamatory content posted by third parties. This article argues that current law is not suitable to dealing with issues of internet defamation and intermediary responsibility because it is needlessly complex, confusing, and may impose liability without blameworthiness. Instead, the article proposes that publication be redefined to require a deliberate act of communicating specific words. This would better reflect blameworthiness and few intermediaries would be liable in defamation under this test. That said, intermediaries profit …
Deceptively Simple: The Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act,
2019
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
Deceptively Simple: The Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Margaret E. Rushing
Arkansas Law Review
In the 2017 legislative session, the Arkansas General Assembly significantly changed the Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (“ADTPA”). These changes now prohibit private class actions under the ADTPA and require plaintiffs to prove additional elements of reliance and actual financial loss when bringing a claim. The changes appear to limit the ability of a consumer to bring a private action under the ADPTA. With these changes, Arkansas joins a minority of jurisdictions with deceptive trade practices acts that increase a plaintiff’s burden and restrict private class actions.
Marijuana Issues For Voters: Studying Issues Us States Have Had With Legalizing Marijuana,
2019
Bowling Green State University
Marijuana Issues For Voters: Studying Issues Us States Have Had With Legalizing Marijuana, Kody Kesler
WRIT: Journal of First-Year Writing
In the United States, the legalization of medical and recreational marijuana in individual states, rather than the whole nation, is a great example of states being “laboratories of democracy.” Legalizing marijuana in the states first is essential to deciding how to go about the issue on the national level, once Americans are ready for it. In most states where it is legal, employees can still be fired for having marijuana in their system, even if they have a medical recommendation. The drug tests that employers use don’t test for the recent use of drugs like marijuana, but for a part …
Department Of Insurance,
2019
University of San Diego
Department Of Insurance, Sarah Marie Burgh, Joseph Cheng, J. D. Fellmeth
California Regulatory Law Reporter
No abstract provided.
Due Process Supreme Court Rockland County,
2019
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division Third Department,
2019
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division Third Department
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division,
2019
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Due Process Pringle V. Wolfe (Decided 28, 1996),
2019
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Due Process Pringle V. Wolfe (Decided 28, 1996)
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Due Process People V. Scott (Decided June 5, 1996),
2019
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Due Process People V. Scott (Decided June 5, 1996)
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Due Process Court Of Appeals,
2019
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Supreme Court Queens County,
2019
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Double Jeopardy,
2019
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Double Jeopardy Supreme Court Appellate Division Second Department,
2019
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Double Jeopardy Supreme Court Appellate Division Second Department
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Double Jeopardy,
2019
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Public Relations Litigation,
2019
Washington and Lee University School of Law
Public Relations Litigation, Kishanthi Parella
Scholarly Articles
Conventional wisdom holds that lawsuits harm a corporation’s reputation. So why do corporations and other businesses litigate even when they will likely lose in the court of law and the court of public opinion? One explanation is settlement: some parties file lawsuits not to win but to force the defendant to pay out. But some business litigants defy even this explanation; they do not expect to win the lawsuit or to benefit financially from settlement. What explains their behavior?
The answer is reputation. This Article explains that certain types of litigation can improve a business litigant’s reputation in the eyes …
State Standing For Nationwide Injunctions Against The Federal Government,
2019
Emory University School of Law
State Standing For Nationwide Injunctions Against The Federal Government, Jonathan R. Nash
Notre Dame Law Review
Recent years have seen a substantial increase of cases in which states seek, and indeed obtain, nationwide injunctions against the federal government. These cases implicate two complicated questions: first, when a state has standing to sue the federal government, and second, when a nationwide injunction is a proper form of relief. For their part, scholars have mostly addressed these questions separately. In this Essay, I analyze the two questions together. Along the way, I identify drawbacks and benefits of nationwide injunctions, as well as settings where nationwide injunctions may be desirable and undesirable. I present arguments that, although I do …
An Organizational Account Of State Standing,
2019
William and Mary Law School
An Organizational Account Of State Standing, Katherine M. Crocker
Notre Dame Law Review
Again and again in regard to recent high-profile disputes, the legal community has tied itself in knots over questions about when state plaintiffs should have standing to sue in federal court, especially in cases where they seek to sue federal-government defendants. Lawsuits challenging everything from the Bush administration’s environmental policies to the Obama administration’s immigration actions to the Trump administration’s travel bans have become mired in tricky and technical questions about whether state plaintiffs belonged in federal court.
Should state standing cause so much controversy and confusion? This Essay argues that state plaintiffs are far more like at least one …
