October 2005
Monthly Archive
Contracts #22: Modification of Contracts Monday, Oct 31 2005
1L and Contracts and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 7:24 pm
Circumstances change, and sometimes contracts need to be modified. When are these modifications binding?
Alaska Packers’ Association v. Domenico
Kelsey-Hayes Co. v. Galtaco Redlaw Castings Corp. (no link available)
Contracts #21: Warranties Monday, Oct 31 2005
1L and Contracts and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 6:46 pm
What warranties and obligations are imposed by law on those who sell goods? Can those warranties and obligations be disclaimed? In this episode we will examine express warranties, and implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.
Bayliner Marine Corp. v. Crow (DOC)
Caceci v. Di Canio Construction Corp. (no link available)
Constitutional Law I #25: Impeachment and Executive Privilege Monday, Oct 31 2005
1L and Constitutional Law and Constitutional Law I and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 6:36 pm
In situations of impeachment and formal court cases regarding the President the question of executive privilege is often raised. What are the countours of this privilege, and when can it (successfully) be raised? We will also look at the history of impeachment in general.
United States v. Nixon
Nixon v. Fitzgerald
Clinton v. Jones
Nixon v. United States
Civil Procedure I #23: Pendant / Supplemental Jurisdiction Monday, Oct 31 2005
1L and Civil Procedure and Civil Procedure I and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 6:26 pm
Now that we’ve determined that the main case belongs in federal court, what do we do with non-federal cases that spring about from the same set of facts? Must we have additional separate (and costly!) trials, or can we consolidate? Additionally, what of additional defendants that are discovered at a later date? When can we attach them to the complaint, even if they would not be normally reachable through federal court?
Mine Workers v. Gibbs
Rice v. Harvard College (no link available)
Aldinger v. Howard
Finley v. United States
Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. Kroger
US Code Title 28, Section 1367
Civil Procedure I #22: Federal Question Wrap-Up Monday, Oct 31 2005
1L and Civil Procedure and Civil Procedure I and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 6:18 pm
We finally wrap-up our introductory definition of a “federal question.” We will look at the general rule for whether a case may be heard in state or federal court (American Well Works: “a suit arises under the law that creates the cause of action”), and then an exception to that rule (Smith: “substantial” questions of federal law may go directly to federal court). We will then apply that framework to the just decided Grable.
American Well Works v. Layne & Bowler Co.
Smith v. Kansas City Title & Trust Co.
Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc. v. Darue Engineering & Manufacturing
Civil Procedure I #21: More on Federal Questions Monday, Oct 31 2005
1L and Civil Procedure and Civil Procedure I and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 6:10 pm
We continue our discussion of federal questions, by focusing on the Merrel Dow case. We find that having a federal question in the complaint raised by the plaintiff is necessary for federal jurisdiction, but apparently not sufficient.
Osborn v. Bank of U.S.
Daubert v. Merrel Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
News and Views #8: ProCD (End User License Agreements) Friday, Oct 21 2005
Neil Wehneman and News and Views 8:35 pm
In 1996 one of the seminal cases on End User License Agreements was decided by Judge Easterbrook of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals: ProCD v. Zeidenberg. I will walk through that opinion, explaining Judge Easterbrook’s analysis and why I strongly disagree with him. I will also give suggestions on how to limit the general harm to society that comes from enforcing End User License Agreements.
This episode is under “News and Views” as I take a specific position and strongly advocate for that position.
ProCD v. Zeidenberg
Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Service Co.
The EFF’s coverage of Blizzard v. BNETD
Torts #28: Rescue and Rescuers I Friday, Oct 21 2005
1L and Neil Wehneman and Torts and University of Cincinnati College of Law 2:16 am
A tortfeasor is negligent, and someone is put in harm’s way as a result. What happens if a rescuer is damaged as they try to extricate that person from (further) harm? The illustrious Judge Cardozo tells us the state of the law.
Arthur Wagner v. International Railway Company (scroll down past questions)
Torts #27: Subsequent Criminal Acts Friday, Oct 21 2005
1L and Neil Wehneman and Torts and University of Cincinnati College of Law 1:25 am
We’ve discussed subsequent acts, and whether or not they are simply “intervening” or cut off liability as “superceding.” But when the subsequent acts are criminal? We will look at several examples in this episode.
Watson v. Kentucky & Indiana Bridge & RR Co. (no link available)
Torts #26: Acts of God Friday, Oct 21 2005
1L and Neil Wehneman and Torts and University of Cincinnati College of Law 12:46 am
In this episode we will examine Acts of God, and how they play into our discussion of intervening and superceding acts.