Skip to content
Volume 108 - Issue 6

An Erie Silence: Erie Guesses and Their Effects on State Courts, Common Law, and Jurisdictional Federalism

By Connor Shaull. Full Text. In the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case of Erie R.R. v. Tompkins, the Court broadly interpreted the Judiciary Act’s limitations and noted that: “There is no federal general common law.” This first-year law school lesson appears simple enough: federal courts, when applying any substantive state law, must defer to the…

Continue Reading

Note: Addressing the HIPAA-potamus Sized Gap in Wearable Technology Regulation

By Paige Papandrea. Full Text. Wearable technology is wildly popular. It is also wildly unregulated. Millions of consumers buy and use these devices, which can constantly track and transmit a variety of users’ health information. Although this health information is similar to, and in many cases more abundant than, information collected by doctors and health…

Continue Reading

Note: A Broken Theory: The Malfunction Theory of Strict Products Liability and the Need for a New Doctrine in the Field of Surgical Robotics

By Christopher Beglinger. Full Text. The malfunction theory of strict products liability affords a plaintiff an inference of a product defect through the presentation of circumstantial evidence. Under the malfunction theory, a plaintiff may establish a prima facie case by providing evidence of the nature of a product malfunction, evidence eliminating abnormal use of the…

Continue Reading

Note: The Controversial Demise of Zauderer: Revitalizing Zauderer Post-NIFLA

By Aaron Stenz. Full Text. The First Amendment broadly stands for the idea that government attempts to curtail the right of the American people to both speak and not speak should be viewed with the utmost skepticism. In the context of compelled commercial speech, however, that scrutiny is lessened. Zaudererv. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of…

Continue Reading

Note: Incognito Mode Is in the Constitution

By Travis Panneck. Full Text. How much should the government be able to learn about an internet user without probable cause? Following the third-party doctrine, courts have held that internet users have no reasonable expectation of privacy in information “turned over” to internet service providers through ordinary use of the internet. Through minimal compulsory process,…

Continue Reading

Note: A Monumental Task: How Should Courts Review Challenges to Presidential Actions Taken Pursuant to the Antiquities Act?

By Bryan Mette. Full Text. The Antiquities Act of 1906 authorizes the President to designate national monuments on federally owned lands. Administrations have employed this authority to create approximately 160 national monuments. In December 2017, President Trump raised the ire of national monument proponents when he drastically reduced the size of Grand Staircase-Escalante and Bears…

Continue Reading

Halo from the Other Side: An Empirical Study of District Court Findings of Willful Infringement and Enhanced Damages Post-Halo

The United States patent system is designed to reward inventors and patent holders who contribute novel, impactful, and non-obvious work. To maintain this system, Congress authorized damages as a remedy for infringed inventions. Whether compensatory or punitive, the system’s main goal is to prevent the proliferation of unwanted “infringing” behavior. Outside of that guidance, there is little definition of what qualifies as egregious behavior, thereby leaving lower courts significant discretion to decide how much to award in damages. Integral to the allocation of damages is the standard by which courts evaluate egregious, or “willful,” behavior.

Continue Reading

Note: Material Breach, Material Disclosure

By Tash Bottum. Full text here. Federal disclosure law requires companies to report certain types of events on a current basis. This reporting regime aims to promote transparency, enhance informed investments, and protect investors. However, the disclosure requirements are currently governed by a vague materiality standard, which fails to adequately guide companies in determining whether…

Continue Reading

Note: When Added Hurdles Cause Actual Prejudice: Exempting Knowing-Use-of-Perjured-Testimony Claims from Brecht Analysis on Collateral Review

By Melanie A. Johnson. Full text here. The knowing use of perjured testimony is considered one of the most serious constitutional trial errors established in Brady v. Maryland. Yet, due to an unresolved gap in habeas jurisprudence, circuits courts have split on the materiality standard required for a habeas petitioner to bring such a claim on…

Continue Reading