Date of Publication:
Darryl Wilson, “PropTech”: The Digital Progression of Efficiency and Fraud, 54 Real Estate Law Journal 7 (2025)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Elizabeth Ippolito Boals, Cheating with the Fifth Amendment: Weaponizing the Fifth Amendment Privilege to Undermine Equitable Dissolution of Marriages, 58 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 363 (2025)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Despite widespread adoption of no-fault divorce, many U.S. states still consider adultery in the allocation of alimony and property. In sixteen of those states, adultery remains a criminal offense-enabling spouses accused of infidelity to invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination during divorce proceedings. This Article explores how such invocations obstruct discovery, delay litigation, and create strategic advantages for wealthier or culpable spouses, especially in fault-based or hybrid divorce regimes. After surveying the historical development of divorce law and the expansion of Fifth Amendment protections into civil contexts, the Article critiques current remedies-adverse inferences, implied waivers, and immunity-as ineffective or impractical. It argues for a proactive procedural solution: mandatory early-stage judicial inquiry into privilege claims and the application of precise adverse inferences tied to the scope of questioning. This approach, the Article contends, would mitigate inequity and restore fairness to divorce proceedings impacted by outdated adultery statutes.
Date of Publication:
Will Bunting, Silencing Corporate Political Speech, 84 Md. L. Rev. 865 (2025)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
This Article categorizes corporate speech along two distinct dimensions: (1) commercial versus non-commercial, and (2) political versus non-political. Using this terminology, this paper introduces a novel taxonomy of corporate speech that includes a definition of pure political speech. The central claim set forth here is that pure political speech should not be permitted as a matter of state corporate law. Embedded within state corporate law must be a steadfast commitment to the simple proposition that market-based business entities must not influence what is considered right and wrong either morally or as regards matters of public policy unrelated to its business operations. Recognizing the difficulties inherent in overcoming the business judgment rule protection enjoyed by corporate fiduciaries, the paper advances a different litigation theory to silence pure political speech grounded in the notion of shareholder oppression, contending that political speech by a business corporation ought to constitute prima facie evidence of oppressive conduct. Introducing the novel concept of an ideological dividend, this paper contends that pure political speech can be conceptualized as a form of unlawful shareholder oppression no different than a dividend paid to some shareholders of the corporation but not others.
In addition, this Article offers two concrete policy proposals to silence pure political speech: (1) modify shareholder oppression statutes to include pure political speech as a form of oppressive conduct, and (2) encourage courts to recognize political speech as prima facie evidence of oppressive conduct in a shareholder oppression claim. To support these policy proposals, the paper provides two justifications for why purely economic decisions should not be motivated by ideological considerations. First, permitting ideology to influence economic decision-making can result in a socially inefficient allocation of scare resources. Second, allowing economic actors to sort by political ideology can exacerbate existing ideological divisions in a society already deeply divided.
Date of Publication:
Dagmar Rita Myslinska, Subduing Asylum-Seekers’ Voices: Narrative Genres and the Impossibility of Credibility Tests during Refugee Status Determination Hearings Review Section: International Book Essays, 50 Law & Social Inquiry 635 (2025)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Darryl Wilson, Keeping Current – Property, 39 Probate and Property 18 (2025)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Catherine J. Cameron, Illuminating the Iceberg: Brain Science and Punitive Damages in Libel Cases, 60 Tulsa L. Rev. 351 (2025)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Royal C. Gardner, Sackett and the Five Stages of Grief, 38 Tulane Envtl. L. Journal 263 (2025)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Rebecca C. Morgan, Research Handbook on Law, Society, and Ageing (Reviews), 16 Journal of Aging Law & Policy 86 (2025)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Rebecca C. Morgan, Older Adults in the Courtroom, CTLA Forum (2025)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Robyn Powell et al., Experiences with and Perceptions of the Child Welfare System During the Perinatal Period of Mothers with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 19 Journal of Public Child Welfare 751 (2025)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
This qualitative study explored the perceptions and experiences of 16 mothers with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) regarding their interactions with the child welfare system during the perinatal period. Adverse themes included fear of child removal, wariness of the healthcare system, insufficient assistance, and trauma and stress. Positive themes included support from others and believing in one’s self. Findings underscore the need for disability cultural competence, non-discrimination, family preservation, enhanced support, self-advocacy, and family-centered care across perinatal and child welfare systems to improve equity for mothers with IDD and their children. Further research is warranted.