for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
help
  Subjects -> LAW (Total: 1418 journals)
    - CIVIL LAW (37 journals)
    - CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (49 journals)
    - CORPORATE LAW (88 journals)
    - CRIMINAL LAW (24 journals)
    - CRIMINOLOGY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT (147 journals)
    - FAMILY AND MATRIMONIAL LAW (22 journals)
    - INTERNATIONAL LAW (186 journals)
    - JUDICIAL SYSTEMS (22 journals)
    - LAW (834 journals)
    - LAW: GENERAL (9 journals)

LAW (834 journals)                  1 2 3 4 5 | Last

Showing 1 - 200 of 354 Journals sorted alphabetically
(En)clave Comahue. Revista Patagónica de Estudios Sociales     Open Access  
ABA Journal Magazine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 25)
Acta Juridica     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Acta Politica     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 15)
Acta Universitatis Danubius. Juridica     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Actualidad Jurídica Ambiental     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Adam Mickiewicz University Law Review     Open Access  
Adelaide Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 23)
Administrative Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 44)
Aegean Review of the Law of the Sea and Maritime Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
African Journal of Legal Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
African Journal on Conflict Resolution     Open Access   (Followers: 21)
Afrilex     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Ahkam : Jurnal Hukum Islam     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Ahkam : Jurnal Ilmu Syariah     Open Access  
Air and Space Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 20)
Akron Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Al 'Adalah : Jurnal Hukum Islam     Open Access  
Al-Ahkam     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Alaska Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Albany Law Review     Free   (Followers: 6)
Alberta Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 14)
Alternative Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Alternatives : Global, Local, Political     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Amazon's Research and Environmental Law     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
American Journal of Comparative Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 58)
American Journal of Jurisprudence     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 19)
American Journal of Law & Medicine     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 11)
American Journal of Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
American Journal of Trial Advocacy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
American University Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 11)
American University National Security Law Brief     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Amicus Curiae     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Amsterdam Law Forum     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Anales de la Cátedra Francisco Suárez     Open Access  
Annales Canonici     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Annales de droit     Open Access  
Annales de la Faculté de Droit d’Istanbul     Open Access  
Annals of the Faculty of Law in Belgrade - Belgrade Law Review     Open Access  
Anuario da Facultade de Dereito da Universidade da Coruña     Open Access  
Anuario de Psicología Jurídica     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
ANZSLA Commentator, The     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Appeal : Review of Current Law and Law Reform     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Arbitration Law Monthly     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Arbitration Law Reports and Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
Arctic Review on Law and Politics     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Arena Hukum     Open Access  
Argumenta Journal Law     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Arizona Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Arizona State Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 3)
Arkansas Law Review     Free   (Followers: 6)
Ars Aequi Maandblad     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Art + Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 12)
Article 40     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Artificial Intelligence and Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
ASAS : Jurnal Hukum dan Ekonomi Islam     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy     Hybrid Journal  
Asian American Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Asian Journal of Law and Society     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
Asian Journal of Legal Education     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Asian Pacific American Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Asy-Syir'ah : Jurnal Ilmu Syari'ah dan Hukum     Open Access  
Australasian Law Management Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Australian and New Zealand Sports Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
Australian Feminist Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Australian Indigenous Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 22)
Australian Journal of Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 15)
Ave Maria Law Review     Free   (Followers: 3)
Badamai Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Ballot     Open Access  
Baltic Journal of Law & Politics     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Bar News: The Journal of the NSW Bar Association     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
Behavioral Sciences & the Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 28)
Beijing Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Berkeley Journal of Entertainment and Sports Law     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Berkeley Technology Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 13)
Bioethics Research Notes     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 14)
Boletín de la Asociación Internacional de Derecho Cooperativo     Open Access  
Bond Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 18)
Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice     Open Access   (Followers: 11)
Boston College Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 16)
Boston University Law Review     Free   (Followers: 11)
BRICS Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Brigham Young University Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
British Journal of American Legal Studies     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Brooklyn Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Bulletin of Legal Medicine     Open Access  
Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Business and Human Rights Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
C@hiers du CRHIDI     Open Access  
Cadernos de Dereito Actual     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Cadernos de Informação Jurídica     Open Access  
Cadernos do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito - PPGDir./UFRGS     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário     Open Access  
Cahiers Droit, Sciences & Technologies     Open Access  
California Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 20)
California Lawyer     Free  
California Western Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Cambridge Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 188)
Campbell Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Campus Legal Advisor     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 11)
Canadian Journal of Law and Society     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 20)
Case Western Reserve Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Časopis pro právní vědu a praxi     Open Access  
Catalyst : A Social Justice Forum     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
Catholic University Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Chicago-Kent Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Chicana/o-Latina/o Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
China : An International Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 19)
China-EU Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
Chinese Journal of Comparative Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Chinese Law & Government     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
Cleveland State Law Review     Free   (Followers: 2)
College Athletics and The Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Colombia Forense     Open Access  
Columbia Journal of Environmental Law     Free   (Followers: 11)
Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 16)
Columbia Law Review (Sidebar)     Open Access   (Followers: 20)
Commercial Law Quarterly: The Journal of the Commercial Law Association of Australia     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Comparative Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 40)
Comparative Legal History     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8)
Comparative Legilinguistics     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Con-texto     Open Access  
Conflict Resolution Quarterly     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 43)
Conflict Trends     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 13)
Cornell Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 12)
Criterio Jurídico     Open Access  
Critical Analysis of Law : An International & Interdisciplinary Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Cuadernos de Historia del Derecho     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Cuestiones Juridicas     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Current Legal Problems     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 29)
Danube     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
De Jure     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
De Rebus     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Deakin Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 15)
Debater a Europa     Open Access  
Defense Counsel Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Democrazia e diritto     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Denning Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
DePaul Journal of Women, Gender and the Law     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
DePaul Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Der Staat     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 14)
Derecho Animal. Forum of Animal Law Studies     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Derecho PUCP     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Derecho y Ciencias Sociales     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Derechos en Acción     Open Access  
Deusto Journal of Human Rights     Open Access  
Dicle Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi     Open Access  
Die Verwaltung     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
Dikaion     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Dike     Open Access  
Dikê : Revista de Investigación en Derecho, Criminología y Consultoría Jurídica     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Diké : Revista Jurídica     Open Access  
Direito e Desenvolvimento     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Diritto penale contemporaneo     Free   (Followers: 2)
Diritto, immigrazione e cittadinanza     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Dixi     Open Access  
Doxa : Cuadernos de Filosofía del Derecho     Open Access  
Droit et Cultures     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Droit et Médecine Bucco-Dentaire     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Droit, Déontologie & Soin     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Drug Science, Policy and Law     Full-text available via subscription  
Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Duke Forum for Law & Social Change     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy     Open Access   (Followers: 16)
Duke Law & Technology Review     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
Duke Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 26)
DULR Online     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
East Asia Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
ECI Interdisciplinary Journal for Legal and Social Policy     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Economics and Law     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Edinburgh Law Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 19)
Education and the Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
El Cotidiano     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Election Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 25)
Energy Law Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Environmental Justice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
Environmental Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 22)
Environmental Policy and Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
ERA-Forum     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Erasmus Law Review     Open Access  
Erciyes Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi     Open Access  
Espaço Jurídico : Journal of Law     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
ESR Review : Economic and Social Rights in South Africa     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Ethnopolitics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Ethos: Official Publication of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
EU Agrarian Law     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Europaisches Journal fur Minderheitenfragen     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
European Energy and Environmental Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 13)
European Journal for Education Law and Policy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
European Journal of Comparative Law and Governance     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
European Journal of Law and Technology     Open Access   (Followers: 18)
European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
European Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 170)
European Public Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 37)
European Review of Contract Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 25)

        1 2 3 4 5 | Last

Similar Journals
Journal Cover
Boston College Law Review
Number of Followers: 16  

  This is an Open Access Journal Open Access journal
ISSN (Print) 0161-6587
Published by Boston College Homepage  [8 journals]
  • Size Matters: Force and Size Disparity in Cases of Aggravated Sexual Abuse

    • Authors: Janine Hanrahan
      Abstract: In 2018, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a jury’s finding that a corrections officer deprived a female inmate of her civil rights through his commission of aggravated sexual abuse. Following the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals while splitting with the Fifth, Eighth, and Tenth Circuit Courts of Appeals, the Third Circuit held that size and coercive power disparities between a defendant and a victim do not speak to the force element of the federal aggravated sexual abuse statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2241(a). Although the Third Circuit takes a balanced approach, its adoption of the Seventh Circuit’s analysis is problematic because the court ignores the Seventh Circuit’s underlying assumption that force must result in bodily injury. Such thinking ignores the legislative intent behind the statute and effectively reintroduces the outdated resistance doctrine.
      PubDate: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 21:34:24 PDT
       
  • When the Same Words Mean Different Things: Varjabedian v. Emulex Corp.,
           and the Requirements of Section 14(e) of the Exchange Act

    • Authors: Isaac Lederman
      Abstract: On April 20, 2018, in Varjabedian v. Emulex Corp., the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires only a showing of negligence, not scienter, to establish a violation. The Ninth Circuit derived that requirement from the fact that Section 14(e) resembles Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933. In reaching this conclusion, the Ninth Circuit split with all the other courts to consider this question. The Second, Third, Fifth, Sixth, and Eleventh Circuits had previously held that Section 14(e) shares more similarities with Rule 10b-5, itself promulgated under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act. Under that line of reasoning, because Rule 10b-5 actions have a scienter requirement, so too do Section 14(e) actions. This Comment argues that the majority view, that Section 14(e) more closely resembles Rule 10b-5 and thus requires a showing of scienter, not mere negligence, is correct.
      PubDate: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 21:34:17 PDT
       
  • A Tragedy of Novelty: Is For-Cause Removal Protection for the Consumer
           Financial Protection Bureau's Single Director a Fatal Flaw'

    • Authors: Logan Hovie
      Abstract: On January 31, 2018, the en banc United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held, in PHH Corp. v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) was permissibly organized under the Supreme Court’s removal power jurisprudence. In doing so, the court found that the CFPB’s structure, which provided the agency’s single director for-cause removal protection, did not impinge on the President’s powers under Article II of the U.S. Constitution. Nonetheless, the fate of the CFPB remains in doubt. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has agreed to hear an appeal in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. RD Legal Funding, after the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York found that the CFPB was unconstitutionally structured, adopting, in toto, sections I–IV of then-Judge Kavanaugh’s PHH Corp. dissent. This Comment argues that then-Judge Kavanaugh’s dissenting opinion inappropriately supplants Congress’s judgment regarding the appropriate structure of the CFPB.
      PubDate: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 21:34:10 PDT
       
  • The Effect of the Internet Era and South Dakota v. Wayfair on the
           Unitary Business Rule

    • Authors: Phillip Popkin
      Abstract: On June 21, 2018, the Supreme Court in South Dakota v. Wayfair eliminated the sales tax physical presence rule for the Dormant Commerce Clause’s “substantial nexus” requirement. This decision extends a State’s ability to tax interstate commerce. This Comment argues that Wayfair’s expansion of state tax jurisdiction should be applicable all forms of state taxation, as opposed to solely sales tax because it interprets the substantial nexus requirement of the Dormant Commerce Clause. Corporate taxation’s unitary business rule should utilize the changes to the substantial nexus requirement to restore its original intention and adapt to modern technology.
      PubDate: Fri, 01 Mar 2019 17:47:59 PST
       
  • "Good Faith" Trademark Infringement: The Ninth Circuit's Approach to
           the Tea Rose-Rectanus Doctrine

    • Authors: Roya Tabibi
      Abstract: In 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in Stone Creek, Inc. v. Omnia Italian Design, Inc. that the “good faith” element of the Tea Rose-Rectanus doctrine, a common-law affirmative defense to trademark infringement, requires the junior user to have used the trademark without knowledge of the senior user’s prior use of the mark. This ruling echoed the Seventh Circuit’s similar finding in 1982 in Money Store v. Harriscorp Finance, Inc., and the Eighth Circuit’s finding in 2001 in National Association for Healthcare Communications, Inc. v. Central Arkansas Area Agency on Aging, Inc. The Ninth Circuit decision deepened the split with the Tenth and Fifth Circuits, which ruled in 1991 and 2001, respectively, that knowledge is not dispositive of bad faith, but is merely one factor to consider in a good faith inquiry. This Comment argues that the Ninth Circuit correctly decided that knowledge of a senior user’s prior use of a mark destroys the good faith defense under the Tea Rose-Rectanus doctrine.
      PubDate: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 20:50:17 PST
       
  • Duty or No Duty' That Is the Question: The Second Circuit Reasserts
           That a Violation of Item 303's Duty to Disclose Can Establish
           Liability Under Section 10(B)

    • Authors: Rebecca Rabinowitz
      Abstract: On March 29, 2016, in Indiana Public Retirement Systems v. SAIC, Inc., the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reaffirmed its earlier conclusion that a violation of the duty to disclose imposed on publicly traded companies by Item 303 of Regulation S-K can constitute a violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. In so doing, the Second Circuit directly conflicted with a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Cohen v. NVIDIA Corp. (In re NVIDIA Corp. Securities Litigation), despite the fact that both courts relied upon the Third Circuit’s Oran v. Stafford opinion in reaching their decisions. This Comment argues that a violation of Item 303 can constitute a violation of Section 10(b), and, further, that the Second Circuit adopted the correct approach because it faithfully construed the underlying regulation and statute, correctly followed earlier jurisprudence, and furthered, not frustrated, the principal goals of the federal securities laws.
      PubDate: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 20:50:09 PST
       
  • Third-Party Funding in Investment Arbitration: Misappropriation of Access
           to Justice Rhetoric by Global Speculative Finance

    • Authors: Tara Santosuosso et al.
      Abstract: The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) is considering changes to its rules governing international arbitration proceedings. UNCITRAL Working Group III is analyzing possible reforms of the arbitral rules to address the risks associated with the increased prevalence of third-party funded investment arbitration claims. Funders claim that existing regulation is sufficient, arguing in part that funding provides access to justice for impecunious claimants who otherwise would be unable to bring claims. This Essay argues that funders’ access to justice reasoning is flawed at best and dangerously misleading at worst. UNCITRAL must take immediate action to address the potential for exploitative practices by funders in the investment context.
      PubDate: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 20:50:00 PST
       
  • The Interdependent Relationship of a Free Press and an Independent
           Judiciary in a Constitutional Democracy

    • Authors: Robert J. Cordy
      Abstract: For nearly 240 years, we have recognized, at least constitutionally, that it is essential to the very existence of a constitutional democracy that there be an independent judiciary and a free press. What is not often appreciated is how dependent these two vital institutions are upon each other. Certainly, judges and journalists rarely think in such terms. But events occurring at home and around the world in fledgling and failing democracies should heighten our awareness and appreciation for their interdependence, and help us better understand the liberties and fundamental rights they protect.
      PubDate: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 20:49:52 PST
       
  • Remedying Wrongful Convictions Through DNA Testing: Expanding
           Post-Conviction Litigants’ Access to DNA Database Searches to Prove
           Innocence

    • Authors: Kayleigh E. McGlynn
      Abstract: Forensic science is used as evidence in criminal cases regularly. Recently, however, scientists have criticized several commonly used forensic methods that are unreliable, scientifically invalid, and have contributed to wrongful convictions. In contrast, DNA testing, which is reliable and valid, is a powerful resource for exonerating wrongfully convicted individuals. Congress and all fifty states have enacted statutes providing access to post-conviction DNA testing. Only nine states, however, have enacted statutes granting post-conviction litigants access to another important resource—law enforcement DNA database searches. Even though Congress amended the federal post-conviction DNA testing statute to provide access to DNA database searches in 2016, only applicants incarcerated for federal offenses are eligible for relief under this statute. This Note argues that, to remedy wrongful convictions, all state legislatures should amend post-conviction DNA testing statutes to provide access to DNA database searches. Alternatively, Congress should amend the federal post-conviction DNA testing statute to provide post-conviction litigants wrongly convicted of state offenses with access to DNA database searches.
      PubDate: Mon, 25 Feb 2019 20:31:37 PST
       
  • Who Will Educate Me' Using the Americans with Disabilities Act to
           Improve Educational Access for Incarcerated Juveniles with Disabilities

    • Authors: Lauren A. Koster
      Abstract: Youth involved with the juvenile justice system present with a higher rate of disability, including mental illness and learning disabilities, than do non-system-involved youth. These young people are often eligible for special education services as provided by the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”). Eligible youth incarcerated in juvenile detention and correctional facilities, however, often fail to receive these services. Education advocates typically bring suits against school districts and correctional institutions alike under the IDEA’s mandate to provide a free appropriate public education to students with disabilities. Unfortunately, this approach is failing because the IDEA is not able to tackle other conditions within facilities that stand as barriers to educational access. The IDEA, however, is not the sole remedy available. The Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), which reaches beyond the educational context and applies to more governmental entities than the IDEA, offers a more robust litigation avenue for enforcing the education rights of incarcerated youth with disabilities. Bringing suit under the ADA, therefore, either alone or in conjunction with the IDEA, could result in more consistent enforcement of incarcerated youths’ right to an education than bringing suit solely under the IDEA.
      PubDate: Mon, 25 Feb 2019 20:31:29 PST
       
  • Modernizing the Stockholder Shield: How Blockchains and Distributed
           Ledgers Could Rescue the Appraisal Remedy

    • Authors: Brandon Ferrick
      Abstract: A recent wave of appraisal litigation has highlighted costly flaws in Delaware’s appraisal law. The genesis of the problems stems from dilapidated assumptions about stock ownership and corporate record keeping baked into the Delaware General Corporation Law. Technological advancements, namely distributed ledgers and blockchain technology, promise to bring Delaware’s appraisal law into the twenty-first century while remaining consistent with existing appraisal law. Distributed ledgers and blockchain technology promise lightning fast clearing times, infallible record keeping, and cost-efficient modes of transfer. States, private actors, and laypersons are already recognizing the litany of benefits offered by these technologies. This Note explores the flaws in the current appraisal system, discusses the benefits offered by distributed ledgers and blockchain technology, and demonstrates how blockchain technology can modernize not only corporate record keeping but appraisal litigation as well.
      PubDate: Mon, 25 Feb 2019 20:31:21 PST
       
  • Creatures of Habit: Predictions About Delaware’s Future Treatment of
           Disclosure Only Settlements and What It Means for Plaintiffs’ Attorneys
           Seeking a Pay Day

    • Authors: Peter Diliberti
      Abstract: Scholars agree that in order for states to either obtain or maintain the business of corporate merger litigation, they must engage in competition with one another. Delaware has participated in this competition in the past to maintain its position as the country’s leading forum for corporate merger litigation. One of the most prominent aspects of this type of litigation is the “disclosure only settlement.” In the 2016 case In re Trulia, the Delaware Court of Chancery broke from a well-established precedent of approving disclosure only settlements and indicated it would be applying a heightened level of scrutiny to them. As a result of this heightened standard, it is likely that plaintiffs’ attorneys will seek out other forums that do not apply such a level of scrutiny to disclosure only settlements. If Delaware wishes to maintain its status as the leading forum for corporate litigation, it will need to employ new strategies. To this end, Delaware has suggested that plaintiffs use something known as the “mootness dismissal scenario” to circumvent the heightened scrutiny that comes with this common type of settlements. This Note hypothesizes that Delaware will continue to promote the mootness dismissal scenario in an attempt to remain competitive. It will be left to plaintiffs’ attorneys to respond by either continuing to file suit in Delaware or testing the waters in what may be friendlier jurisdictions.
      PubDate: Mon, 25 Feb 2019 20:31:12 PST
       
  • Specialized Trial Courts in Patent Litigation: A Review of the Patent
           Pilot Program's Impact on Appellate Reversal Rates at the Five-Year
           Mark

    • Authors: Amy Semet
      Abstract: Do specialized trial court judges make more accurate decisions in patent law cases' In 2011, Congress passed a law setting up a ten-year pilot program to enhance expertise in patent litigation by funneling more trial court decisions to fourteen select district courts. Now that the five-year mark has passed, has the program had its intended effect of increasing accuracy, as measured by less reversal of pilot judges by the Federal Circuit' This Article analyzes trial court patent cases filed from September 2011 through September 2016, focusing specifically on whether the appellate treatment of cases heard by district court judges participating in the pilot program differs from the treatment of cases heard by non-pilot judges. Of the several hundred cases where the Federal Circuit rules on the substantive patent law issues on appeal, the results indicate that, even controlling for other factors, the Federal Circuit does not overrule non-pilot judges more than pilot judges. After discussing the empirical results, the Article proposes suggestions for reform.
      PubDate: Mon, 25 Feb 2019 20:31:04 PST
       
  • Extending the Sex-Plus Discrimination Doctrine to Age Discrimination
           Claims Involving Multiple Discriminatory Motives

    • Authors: Marc Chase McAllister
      Abstract: Federal employment discrimination statutes make it unlawful to discriminate against employees on the basis of certain protected characteristics, including race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability, and age. Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, an employer may not discriminate against an employee based on a combination of two protected traits, such as race and sex. Nevertheless, these claims—which this Article refers to as multiple-motive claims—tend to fail when one of the protected traits is age. Whether brought under Title VII or under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), this Article argues that courts should authorize discrimination claims combining age with some other immutable characteristic, like race or gender, and proposes an amendment to the ADEA that would authorize such claims.
      PubDate: Mon, 25 Feb 2019 20:30:56 PST
       
  • Safe Injection Sites and the Federal "Crack House" Statute

    • Authors: Alex Kreit
      Abstract: Safe injection sites have become the next battlefield in the conflict between state and federal drug laws. A safe injection site is a place where injection drug users can self-administer drugs in a controlled environment under medical supervision. They have been operating in other countries, including Canada, for decades, and a wealth of evidence suggests that they can help to reduce overdose deaths. To date, however, no United States city or state has sanctioned a safe injection site. Until recently, safe injection sites were politically untenable, seen as a form of surrender in the war on drugs. This dynamic, however, has changed over the past few years. Prominent politicians from across the political spectrum have called for an end to the drug war, and the opioid epidemic has grown increasingly dire. Efforts to start safe injection sites are currently underway in at least thirteen United States cities and states. Five cities—Denver, New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Seattle—have gone so far as to announce plans to open an injection site. There is just one small problem: the site proposals appear to violate the federal crack house statute, which makes it a crime to maintain drug-involved premises. The Department of Justice has not yet taken a formal position on safe injection sites, but in a New York Times editorial, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein threatened that “cities and states should expect the Department of Justice to meet the opening of any injection site with swift and aggressive action.” Surprisingly, this looming conflict has gone almost entirely overlooked by legal academics. Meanwhile, the public debate has assumed that safe injection sites are clearly forbidden by federal law. This Article argues that assumption is wrong. Despite the crack house statute, an obscure provision of the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) might allow states and localities to establish government-run safe injection sites. Buried in the CSA is a provision that immunizes state and local officials who violate federal drug laws in the course of “the enforcement of any law or municipal ordinance relating to controlled substances.” This provision was almost surely intended to protect state and local police officers that possess and distribute drugs in connection with undercover operations. Nevertheless, this Article argues, the text of the immunity provision and the scarce case law interpreting it suggest it could shield government-run safe injection sites from federal interference.
      PubDate: Mon, 25 Feb 2019 20:30:48 PST
       
  • Is Trolling Trump a Right or a Privilege': The Erroneous Finding in
           Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University v. Trump

    • Authors: Lauren Beausoleil
      Abstract: On May 23, 2018, in Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University v. Trump, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York considered whether the President of the United States violated the First Amendment rights of individuals by blocking them on Twitter. In doing so, the district court agreed with the plaintiffs’ allegations that blocking constituted impermissible viewpoint discrimination in the context of a public forum. Despite the long history of the public forum doctrine, the information age has presented new questions regarding the doctrine, and Knight First Amendment Institute marks the first instance in which a court identified a public forum within a public official’s twitter account. This Comment argues that application of the public forum doctrine to a portion of the President’s Twitter account was inappropriate.
      PubDate: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 06:03:01 PST
       
  • Survival of the Trademark License: In re Tempnology and Contract
           Rejection in Bankruptcy

    • Authors: Avery Minor
      Abstract: On January 12, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held, in In re Tempnology, that forcing specific performance of a trademark license after a contract rejection in a bankruptcy case would be contrary to the plain-language of Section 365(n) of the Bankruptcy Code and conflict with the goal of providing debtors with a “fresh start.” In so doing, the First Circuit joined the Fourth Circuit in a split with the Seventh Circuit, which has characterized a contract rejection as a breach in the context of non-bankruptcy law, therefore not extinguishing any trademark license rights. This Comment argues that the Seventh Circuit approach is the correct one as it takes legislative intent into consideration, does not impede a debtor’s ability to have a fresh start, and will likely not have any detrimental economic effects.
      PubDate: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 07:15:35 PST
       
  • Categorizing Wayne's World: The Public Forum Doctrine and Public
           Access Channels

    • Authors: Michael Molstad
      Abstract: On February 9, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held, in Halleck v. Manhattan Community Access Corp., that a public access channel administered by the Manhattan Community Access Corporation and three of its employees was a public forum. In doing so, the court determined that a complaint against Manhattan Community Access Corporation and those three employees sufficiently alleged state action. The legal status of public access channels has been unsettled since 1996, when the Supreme Court explicitly chose not to decide whether public access channels were public forums in Denver Area Educational Telecommunications Consortium v. FCC. This Comment argues that the Second Circuit correctly determined that the public access channels at issue in Halleck were public forums, while refraining from making a sweeping proclamation about all public access channels. This Comment further argues that such a broad categorization would be unwise since public access channels have differing characteristics, particularly in light of the fact that public access channels are negotiated between individual cable operators and franchising authorities.
      PubDate: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 07:15:25 PST
       
  • A Dirty Waste—How Renewable Energy Policies Have Financed the
           Unsustainable Waste-to-Energy Industry

    • Authors: Hale McAnulty
      Abstract: The end of the 20th Century saw a major shift in the United States’ approach to energy policy. After decades focused on fossil fuel production, the country began to realize that renewable sources of energy were the way of the future. Motivated by environmental concerns and a realization that oil is a finite resource, the federal government and local governments began adopting economic policies that rewarded investment in and production of renewable, clean technology. Governments relied on both mandates and tax incentives to encourage the use of energy from sources like solar and wind power. Waste-to-Energy (“WTE”) power is another form of energy production that is classified as renewable. Thus, WTE has benefited significantly from renewable energy policies. WTE, however, is a form of energy produced by burning trash and is neither environmentally friendly nor particularly sustainable. Yet, the WTE industry owes its existence to those government programs designed to fund sustainable sources of electricity. With WTE drawing from the same pot of government resources, the policies that were written to stimulate the sustainable energy field and protect the environment have undermined those very goals by subsidizing the WTE industry. This Note summarizes the WTE process and the laws that allowed it to grow, argues that WTE is not economically sound or environmentally sustainable, and proposes legislative changes to prevent more harm from WTE in the future.
      PubDate: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 00:25:08 PST
       
 
 
JournalTOCs
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Email: journaltocs@hw.ac.uk
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
Fax: +00 44 (0)131 4513327
 
Home (Search)
Subjects A-Z
Publishers A-Z
Customise
APIs
Your IP address: 54.242.115.55
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-