September 2005
Monthly Archive
Civil Procedure I #12: The DeCSS Jurisdiction Case Monday, Sep 26 2005
1L and Civil Procedure and Civil Procedure I and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 7:18 pm
What happens to personal jurisdiction when we toss the Internet into the mix? This 2002 California Supreme Court case Pavlovich v. Superior Court attempts to answer that question.
Please note that I am a financial supporter of the organization (the Electronic Frontier Foundation) that funded and coordinated the defense in this case. As such, I do not posit that my persepective is free from bias.
Civil Procedure I #11: The Asahi Case Monday, Sep 26 2005
1L and Civil Procedure and Civil Procedure I and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 7:13 pm
How far does a State’s long-arm statute reach? Does it reach overseas? What if there are no longer any defendants coming from the forum state? A divided Supreme Court attempts to answer that question in Asahi.
Torts #13: More on Statutory Duties Monday, Sep 19 2005
1L and Neil Wehneman and Torts and University of Cincinnati College of Law 12:19 am
We continue our discussion on determing common law duties from satute. In doing so, we examine a case from Texas that turned on the non-reporting of child abuse.
Martin v. Herzog (no link available)
Perry v. S.N. and S.N.
Torts #12: Tort Reform and Statutory Duties Monday, Sep 19 2005
1L and Neil Wehneman and Torts and University of Cincinnati College of Law 12:07 am
We close out our examination of medical cases by considering the issue of tort reform and how the state of Ohio has handled that subject. We then transition into the rules for applying statutes as common law duties.
Osborne v. McMasters (no link available)
Torts #11: Moore v. Regents of University of California Sunday, Sep 18 2005
1L and Neil Wehneman and Torts and University of Cincinnati College of Law 11:57 pm
In an incredibly interesting case, a man sues his doctor for removing his spleen and undertaking extensive research on it that is eventually strongly monetized. Theories of recovery are conversion, lack of informed consent, and breach of fudiciary trust.
Contracts #9: Public Policy Sunday, Sep 18 2005
1L and Contracts and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 11:43 pm
We continue our discussion on unconscionability by transitioning into public policy. Our discussion of public policy centers around a non-compete agreement and a contract between husband and wife.
Valley Medical Specialists v. Farber (PDF)
Borelli v. Brusseau
A & M Produce v. FMC Corp. (no link available)
Contracts #8: Unconscionability Sunday, Sep 18 2005
1L and Contracts and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 11:38 pm
What is unconscionability? What do we do when we find a contract that contains unconscionable clauses? Answers to these questions and more await in this episode.
Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co
Adkins v. Labor Ready, Inc.
Contracts #7: More on Consideration Sunday, Sep 18 2005
1L and Contracts and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 11:30 pm
We continue to examine consideration, looking at some interesting cases dealing with donative promises, unequal consideration, and conditions placed on receiving consideration.
Dougherty v. Salt (No link available)
Batsakis v. Demotsis (No link available)
Plowman v. Indian Refining Co. (No link available)
Constitutional Law I #12: United States v. Lopez Sunday, Sep 18 2005
1L and Constitutional Law and Constitutional Law I and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 11:25 pm
Can Congress regulate the carrying of guns near schools? According to a 5-4 split Court the answer is no. A federalism-saving decision (or so the majority would say) shakes up the near-limitless power Congress had been claiming under the Commerce Clause.
Constitutional Law I #11: New Deal Part Two Sunday, Sep 18 2005
1L and Constitutional Law and Constitutional Law I and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 11:09 pm
With a change in the makeup of the Supreme Court comes an easier time for FDR’s New Deal legislation. We’ll see former tests and cases thrown out as a new way of viewing the Commerce Clause evolves.
NLRB v. Jones and Laughlin Steel Corp.
U.S. v. Darby
Wickard v. Filburn