Date of Publication:
Michael S. Finch et al., Federal Courts: Context, Cases, and Problems (1st ed., Aspen Publishers, 2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Ellen S. Podgor and John F. Cooper (eds.), Overview of U.S. Law (1st ed., LexisNexis, 2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Steven Lubet and Elizabeth Ippolito Boals, A Guide for Expert Witnesses and the Lawyers Who Examine Them (2nd ed., NITA, 2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Linda S. Anderson, Adding Players to the Game: Parentage Determinations When Assisted Reproductive Technology is Used to Create Families, 62 Ark. L. Rev. 29 (2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Though some forms of assisted reproduction (ART) have been available for a long time, more recent scientific advances in reproductive technology created opportunities for more people to build families, but consequently caused confusion about who should be considered a parent. In addition, changing family relationships have caused questions about who should be considered a parent.
This article attempts to compare the way various courts identify the legal parents of a child born through assisted reproductive technology. After updating existing discussions about the way parentage decisions are made in ART situations the article provides additional support for creating a predictable and consistent approach to situations that scientific advances force courts and legislatures to address.
With little statutory guidance and constrained by individual and varying state law and public policy, courts have attempted to fashion results while generally trying to avoid usurping legislative powers. This article suggests that until legislatures establish clear guidelines for identifying parents, intent to create a child to raise as one’s own should determine parentage when any form of ART is utilized. In fact, as legislatures tackle this complicated issue, intent can provide a reasonable determining factor of a legal parent.
Date of Publication:
Michael S. Finch, Judicial Evaluation of Traumatically Induced Fybromyalgia, 2 Psychological Injury and the Law 24 (2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Peter Lake, Beyond Discipline: Managing the Modern Higher Education Environment (Hierophant Enterprises, Inc., 2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Catherine J. Cameron, Jumping Off the Merry-Go-Round: How the Federal Courts Will Reconcile the Circular Deference Problem Between HIPAA and FOIA, 58 Cath. U. L. Rev. 333 (2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
This Article introduces the conflict between HIPAA and FOIA in Part II, which explains the provisions of HIPAA and FOIA and the HHS regulations that cover access to medical records held by the federal government. Part II delineates the practical realities agency personnel will face when a record request falls under both HIPAA and FOIA. Part IV of this Article highlights how two states have dealt with HIPAA’s conflict with state statutes to see how those courts have resolved a similar conflict. Part V delves into the case law interpreting Exemption Six of FOIA to conclude that HHS’s assessment that Exemption Six should not cause a conflict with FOIA is inaccurate. Finally, this Article argues that a federal court should decide that public access to a medical record held by a government health provider is dictated by FOIA’s Exemption Six instead of HIPAA and HHS regulations.
Date of Publication:
Ann Piccard, Teaching to Different Levels of Experience: What I Learned From Working With Experienced Writers From Different Fields, 17 Perspectives 115 (2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Ciara Torres-Spelliscy et al., Improving Judicial Diversity, in Women and the Law (Thomson/West, 2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
The United States is more diverse than ever, but its state judges are not. While we recognize that citizens are entitled to a jury of their peers who will be drawn from a pool that reflects the surrounding community, Americans who enter the courtroom often face a predictable presence on the bench: a white male. This is the case despite increasing diversity within law school populations and within state bars across the country. Most of the legal disputes adjudicated in America are heard in state courts. As such, they must serve a broad range of constituencies and an increasingly diverse public. So why are state judiciaries consistently less diverse than the communities they serve? Unfortunately, studies show that both merit selection systems and judicial elections are equally challenged when it comes to creating diversity. Today, white males are overrepresented on state appellate benches by a margin of nearly two-to-one. Almost every other demographic group is underrepresented when compared to their share of the nation’s population. There is also evidence that the number of black male judges is actually decreasing (one study found that there were proportionately fewer black male state appellate judges in 1999 than there were in 1985). There are still fewer female judges than male, despite the fact that the majority of today’s law students are female, as are approximately half of all recent law degree recipients. This pattern is most prevalent in states’ highest courts, where women have historically been almost completely absent.
Date of Publication:
Catherine J. Cameron and Jeffrey J. Minneti, Teaching Every Student: A Demonstration Lesson that Adapts Instruction to Students’ Learning Styles, 17 Perspectives 161 (2009)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Armed with the knowledge that law students have unique and diverse learning styles, we have an opportunity and perhaps an obligation to mold our teaching to the way our students best learn new and difficult information. Through the vehicle of an demonstration lesson that was used in a first-year legal research and writing class at Stetson University College of Law, this article briefly illustrates what such molding might look like and accomplish in a legal research and writing classroom. The article first describes how the authors developed the demonstration lesson. It then describes the lesson itself, and it concludes with student and professor feedback on the lesson.