Litigation Commons^™

“Nationwide” Injunctions Are Really “Universal” Injunctions And They Are Never Appropriate, Howard Wasserman

Faculty Publications

Federal district courts are routinely issuing broad injunctions prohibiting the federal government from enforcing constitutionally invalid laws, regulations, and policies on immigration and immigration-adjacent issues. Styled “nationwide injunctions,” they prohibit enforcement of the challenges laws not only against the named plaintiffs, but against all people and entities everywhere.

The first problem with these injunctions is one of nomenclature. “Nationwide” suggests something about the “where” of the injunction, the geographic scope in which it protects. The better term is “universal injunction,” which captures the real controversy over the “who” of the injunction, as courts purport to protect the universe of all …

Pran Justice: Social Order, Dispute Processing, And Adjudication In The Venezuelan Prison Subculture, Manuel A. Gomez

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The New Settlement Tools, Bernard Chao, Christopher Robertson, David Yokum

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

By protecting the right to a jury, the state and federal constitutions recognize the fundamental value of having civil and criminal disputes resolved by laypersons. Actual trials, however, are relatively rare, in part because parties seek to avoid the risks and cost of trials and courts seek to clear dockets efficiently. But as desirable as settlement may be, it can be a difficult way to resolve a dispute. Parties view their cases from different perspectives, and these perspectives often cause both sides to be overly optimistic and to expect unreasonably large or unreasonably small resolutions.

This article describes a novel …

Clarifying The “Probate Lending” Debate: A Response To Professors Horton And Chandrasekher, Jeremy Kidd

Articles

The debate over third-party funding of legal claims just got more interesting. The debate already had plot twists, such as free-market scholars lining up in opposition to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and alongside proplaintiff scholars who they oppose in tort reform debates. Now add to the mix a recent paper by Professors Horton and Chandrasekher that introduced an entirely new angle to the debate: funding of probate disputes. Now that this parallel area of funding has been identified, comparing and contrasting probate funding with litigation funding should illuminate the incentives that funders/recipients face in both scenarios. By pointing out …

Determining Enhanced Damages After Halo Electronics: Still A Struggle?, Veronica Corcoran

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

35 U.S.C. § 284 of the Patent Act allows district courts to use their discretion to award enhanced damages up to three times the amount found or assessed in the case of patent infringement. This Comment will consider how the Supreme court of the United States’ holding in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse electronics, Inc. changed the landscape of enhanced damages awards in light of willful infringement.

First, this Comment will examine the Federal Circuit’s approach that now embraces both an objective and subjective inquiry in determining enhanced damages, which may resolve the concern over the rigidity in the Seagate …

Patent Eligibility's Doctrinal Exclusions... Lately, A Scary Movie Too Difficult To Watch: Concrete Solutions And Suggestions, Kristy J. Downing

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

Patent eligible subject matter is defined by the legislature’s 35 U.S.C. § 101 to include “any new and useful process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.” Since the nineteenth century, however, United States (U.S.) courts have considered certain otherwise eligible subject matter excludable from patent protection. The judiciary’s doctrinal exclusions’ purpose was to protect fundamental building blocks to science and useful arts ensuring that such information could not be monopolized by one entity. Presently, however, the judicial exclusions have been used to exclude fewer fundamental building blocks and more ordinary brick-and-mortar innovations after two U.S. supreme court decisions (Mayo …

Negligent Entrustment In Gun Industry Litigation: A Primer, Kate E. Britt

Law Librarian Scholarship

Deep pocket jurisprudence, where plaintiffs name corporations as codefendants of less wealthy individual tortfeasors, is not uncommon in tort litigation. When the plaintiffs are victims of gun violence and the corporate defendants are firearms manufacturers, however, these suits are particularly controversial. Instead of aiming to make the victims whole, these suits are opposed (or supported) as attempts to regulate the firearms industry on a widespread basis. This article explores some of the resources available to understand the recent history of suits against firearms manufacturers.

Front Matter, Jtaa Editors

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Class Certification Through 23(B)(3) Discrimination Class Actions - The Fine Line Between Class-Wide Racial Discrimination And Isolated Incidents Of Racial Discrimination - Brown V. Nucor Corp., 785 F.3d 895 (4th Cir. 2015), William Grigas

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Equity Or Inequality: Defining Bad Faith In Involuntary Bankruptcy, Carlos Wilder

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Ignoring Legislative Intent, Double Standard Or Protecting International Tension - Rico After Rjr Nabisco, Hannah Tavella

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law - One Step Closer To Affordability As Sjc Rules Judges Must Now Consider A Defendant's Financial Resources As A Factor When Making Bail Determinations - Brangan V. Commonwealth, 80 N.E.3d 949 (Mass. 2017), Jennifer Amaral

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Expert Report Of Catherine Smith, J.D.: Juliana V. United States, Catherine Smith

Scholarly Articles

The Founders created the architecture for the rights of children to self-determination and protection from the sins of their forebears. A central tenet of our democracy is that government, including these federal defendants, should not deprive children (the next generation) of the foundational elements of their lives, liberties or property and should not impose hardships on them for matters of which they have no control. This historical tradition and intent of the Founders of our nation has not always been realized, but has evolved over time as our society gains new insights and understandings of children and our notions of …

A Bridge Between Copyright And Patent Law: Towards A Modern-Day Reapplication Of The Semiconductor Chip Protection Act, Timothy T. Hsieh

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

This Paper analyzes the history of the Semiconductor Chip Protection Act (SCPA), 17 U.S.C. §§ 901–914, and asks why the statute is so seldom used in intellectual property litigation. Afterwards, this Paper makes the argument that the SCPA should be used more in intellectual property litigation, perhaps in tandem with patent litigation, and can be a viable form of protection for semiconductor micro-fabrication companies or integrated circuit design companies engaged in pioneering innovations within the cutting-edge field of semiconductor technology.

Ousted: The New Dynamics Of Privatized Procedure And Judicial Discretion, Robin Effron

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law - Extra Extra Read All About It: Sex Offender's Request For Reclassification - Noe V. Sex Offender Registry Bd., No. Sucv2014-02071-A, 2017 Mass. Super. Lexis 9 (Mass. Super Ct. Mar. 28, 2017), Keshia L. Blair

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Think Fast: Post Judgment Considerations In Hague Child Abduction Cases, Timothy L. Arcaro

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Welcome To The Jungle: The Application Of Foreign Law In Aircraft Accident Litigation, Bryan S. David

Journal of Air Law and Commerce

Ordinarily, all legally significant aspects pertaining to a lawsuit emanate from a single state (usually the state where the lawsuit was filed), and the court assigned to the lawsuit decides the case based strictly upon the laws of that state. However, by its very nature, aircraft accident litigation often arises from factual scenarios involving people and aircraft emanating from multiple states and even multiple nations. And those scenarios often raise questions regarding which law will apply. The body of law known alternatively as “conflict of laws” or “choice of laws” was specially designed to answer those questions.

However, over the …

Public Defense Litigation: An Overview, Lauren Sudeall Lucas

Faculty Publications By Year

No abstract provided.

How Should Damages Be Calculated For Design Patent Infringement?, Mark D. Janis

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.