Archive: 2012

Time Waits for No Man—But Is Tolled for Certain Post-Judgment Motions: Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(A)(4) and the Fate of Withdrawn Post-Judgment Motions

By: Lena Husani Hughes

 

In 2007, the Supreme Court, in Bowles v. Russell, determined that Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6)’s appeal deadline is a jurisdictional requirement. Failure to meet the deadline cannot be excused, as it divests the court of ...READ MORE

Preserving Political Speech From Ourselves and Others

By Aziz Z. Huq

 

Objecting at the Altar: Why the Herring Good Faith Principle and the Harlow Qualified Immunity Doctrine Should Not Be Married

By John M. Greabe

Response to: Jennifer E. Laurin, Trawling for Herring: Lessons in Doctrinal Borrowing and Convergence, 111 Colum. L. Rev. 670 (2011)

 

 

Marriage as Punishment

By: Melissa Murray

 

Popular discourse portrays marriage as a source of innumerable public and private benefits: happiness, companionship, financial security, and even good health. Complementing this view, our legal discourse frames the right to marry as a right of access, the ...READ MORE

Transaction Consistency and the New Finance in Bankruptcy

By: David A. Skeel, Jr. & Thomas H. Jackson

 

Neither scholars nor the derivatives industry have fully explored the question of how the treatment of derivatives and repos in bankruptcy would change if their exemption from a number of bankruptcy’s core ...READ MORE

Deterring Global Bribery: Where Public and Private Enforcement Collide

By: Rashna Bhojwani

 

The international community has become increasingly concerned with deterring global bribery. While the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (FCPA) serves as the dominant public enforcement mechanism, international arbitration tribunals function as the primary private enforcement mechanism, refusing ...READ MORE

 

Does Five Equal Three? Reading the Takings Clause in Light of the Third Amendment’s Protection of Houses

By: Thomas G. Sprankling

 

The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Kelo v. City of New London broke new ground by holding that the seizure of owner-occupied homes as part of a plan to foster economic development was a taking for “public use” ...READ MORE