Four Decades of the \u3cem\u3eDuquesne Law Review\u3c/em\u3e Volumes 1-40 (1963-2002): A History [Commemoration] (original) (raw)
Related papers
Page 1. WASHINGTON AND LEE LAW REVIEW THE LEWIS F. POWELL, JR. DISTINGUISHED LECTURE From Plyer v. Doe to Trayvon Martin: Toward Closing the Open Society Lyle Denniston ARTICLES Contingent Capital in Executive Compensation Wulf A. Kaal Illuminating Innovation: From Patent Racing to Patent War Lea Shaver The Law School Critique in Historical Perspective A. Benjamin Spencer NOTES The Power of a Suggestion: The Use of Forum Selection Clauses by Delaware Corporations Thomas T.
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2016
What is a law review article? Does America know? How might we help America in this regard? Here, we approach the first question on the bias: As we have found, a growing body of learning and empirical evidence shows that genres are not merely forms, but forms that anticipate their substance. In this Article, then, we try to capture this action by undertaking the first and only comprehensive "performative study" of the genre of the law review article.
Comments on Legislation and Judicial Decisions - Chronique De Legislation et De Jurisprucence
The Canadian Bar Review, 1981
Chronique de législation et de jurisprudence 551 respect of the question of the liability of Beattie and Pettipas. The opening words. of McIntyre J.'s judgment are:6 This appeal concerns the doctrine of,privity of contract and the question of the extent of third party rights under contract. Yet there is no discussion at all of the merits of the doctrine, the court stating that the law had been settled in England in Tweddle v. Atkinson 7 and in Canada in Canadian General Electric Co. Ltd v. Pickford and Black Ltd, 8 a case which itself simply followed earlier English cases without discussion. There was no reference to the very extensive academic criticism of the rule against third party beneficiaries, no mention of the law in the United States, no mention of the recommendation for abolition of the rule by the English Law Revision Committee of 1937, 9 no mention of Lord Reid's statement in Beswick v. Beswick that reform of the law was urgently needed, to or of the Privy Council's determination in New Zealand Shipping Co. Ltd v. A. M. Satterwaite and Co .. Ltd to bring, the law into conformity with commercial expectations ." More surprising still than these omissions is the absence from the judgment of any suggestion that the result is unjust or even inconvenient. Although extensive passages were quoted from thejudgment of MacKeigan C.J .N .S ., the reference to flying in the face of common sense commercial practice and labour relations is not included. One could understand a decision, regretfully reached, that legal doctrine compelled an inconvenient result, but it is surprising that a busy Supreme Court of Canada should give leave to appeal, reversing a convenient result, in order to say that,, and, if that were the attitude of the court, one would expect to see signs of a struggle to reach â result that accorded with commercial convenience, or at the least an appeal to the legislatures to step in where the court found itself unable to do justice on its own. But there is nothing of the kind in the short unanimous judgment of the court. The. practical question is how this decision will affect future cases that raise problems of privity of contract. The New Zealand e Supra, footnote 2.
Law and History Review, 2010
There is an interesting section on the transition to the job-the heavy learning curve, the problems of getting an office running, and the remarkable variety of cases federal judges confront. The chapter on the nature of the job holds few surprises. Most judges like the job with its broad range of subjects and conflicts, although there are complaints about the isolation. It is, though, disturbing to see such distinguished judges and ex-judges as Abner Mikva, Robert Bork, and James Buckley agreeing, at least on their notable Court of Appeals (D.C. Cir.), that after the conference on a case, the judge will go back and likely never speak again in person with his colleagues about it. When coupled with the "revelation" in another chapter that the law clerks are chiefly responsible for opinions (183), one cannot help wondering what creative, thoughtful, and analytical work federal judges are actually doing. A chapter partially named "Getting Along with Others" encompasses Alfred Goodwin's (9th Cir.) discussion of political trials. There is an interesting, though troubling, discussion of past tensions on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and two pages allotted to Andrew Hauk's (C.D. Cal.) oral history demonstrating his "outrageous rudeness." Finally, Joyce Hens Green sums up what makes a good judge: "A judge has to have courage and express the way it is in her opinions, whether oral or written, not just to ride with the waves of the time, economically, politically, emotionally" (212). Both specialists and nonspecialists will learn from Domnarski's book. Nonspecialists will receive a painless introduction to the lives of federal judges and the conditions under which they work. The scholar will pick up a variety of interesting tidbits with a reminder of what a valuable resource for research on the courts oral histories can be.
Book Review: Judicial Review Redux
Federal Law Review
One of the most difficult issues to face a writer is what could be called "the paradox of the groundbreaking work". In a subsequent edition, what is the author of a successful, forward-looking work to do? To update the law goes without saying. But ought the task to stop there? The temptation to leave well enough alone in such a case must be a strong one, for, as the cliche has it, one does not lightly mess with success. Or ought the author to try to better his past efforts; to improve on his success? And if this is to be the course, in what manner ought he to go about it? On the one hand, an author might be tempted to employ the same sort of bold and creative strokes that ,earned the work kudos in the first place. But on the other, the initial edition's internal logic was presumably one of the determinative factors in its success. And not to be forgotten is human nature-the tendency in us all to rest on our laurels. To use another cliche (was it Trotsky who said it?), yesterday's revolutionary tends to be today's conservative. This dilemma is magnified when there has been a change in authorship in succeeding editions. For understandable reasons, every new author wants to lend a distinctive, personalised stamp to the project. But at the same time, a degree of selflessness is generally called for when a new person takes over a pre-existing workespecially when that work has already achieved some prominence. Simply put, the new author of a previous edition must remember just that, namely, that he is working on a new edition of somebody else's work. For very good reason, the dead hand of the past ought to remain a living force when it comes to new editions. Both of these books show the art of the subsequent edition at its finest. Each differs. significant respects from its predecessors, yet the changes have been carried out in BSc, LLB (Dalhousie), LLM (Calif, Berkeley). Lecturer in Law, Australian National University.
Law Review-Is It Meeting the Needs of the Legal Community, The
Denv. LJ, 1967
The authors wish to express their appreciation to the staff for its participation in the collection of initial data and to the Administration of Justice Program of the University of Denver College of Law for its assistance in data compilation. 'Cardozo, Introduction, in SELECTED READINGS ON THE LAW OF CONTRACTS ix (Ass'n. Am. L. Schools ed. 1931).