Date of Publication:
Kristen David Adams and Claude D. Rohwer, Global Issues in Commercial Law (Global Issues series, Thomson/West, 2010)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Linda S. Anderson, Just Because You Want Kids Doesn’t Mean I Can’t Have Them: How Clarifying Definitions of Parent and Procreate Can Prevent the Indefinite Storage of Cryopreserve Embryos, 49 U. Louisville L. Rev. 231 (2010)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Since 1978, when the first “test-tube baby” was born in England, the use of technology to assist with the process of conception has evolved quickly. Today, advances in technology allow the various steps in the process of conception and gestation to be carried out in multiple locations, with multiple contributors to the process, and over an extended period of time. These technological advances call into question many of the assumptions about parenthood and procreation that were indisputable prior to the use of assisted reproductive technology. Courts have attempted to apply the old meanings to questions about the use of new technology, especially with regard to cryopreserved embryos, but admit that they are venturing into uncharted territory. When doing so, they often fall back on language that is familiar, but too imprecise to be helpful. Words like “parent” and “procreate” imply important rights and responsibilities, yet these words never needed defining in the past. Today they do, so this article attempts to re-define these terms by looking at their historical use, new legislation and cases that have tried to clarify them, and the policies behind their regularly-accepted meanings.
Date of Publication:
Andrew D. Appleby, For the Love of the Game: The Justification for Tax Exemption in Intercollegiate Athletics, 44 John Marshall Law Review 179– (2010)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Intercollegiate athletics are a fundamental part of the American college experience. Nothing else unites and impassions entire campuses while providing educational opportunities to thousands of students who might not otherwise be able to attend college. Congress and the IRS have long recognized the immense educational value of intercollegiate athletics and have properly exempted intercollegiate athletics from federal income taxation. However, a few vocal critics have overreacted to escalating broadcasting agreements and coaching salaries, often without stepping back to examine these transactions in a broader tax policy context. This Article does just that, and demonstrates that longstanding tax exemption is undeniably justified in intercollegiate athletics.
This Article begins in Part I with an overview of tax exemption fundamentals, including a discussion of the tax policy justifications for tax exemption. Part II provides a brief history of tax exemption for intercollegiate athletics, as well as an overview of the current legislative posture. Part III provides an analysis of tax exemption in intercollegiate athletics. This part illustrates that intercollegiate athletics satisfy all the requirements for tax exemption, and that even activities such as big-time D-I football and basketball very likely avoid the Unrelated Business Income Tax (UBIT). Additionally, this part demonstrates that tax exemption is justified for intercollegiate athletics under several tax policy justifications, and that intercollegiate athletics also fall outside the UBIT justifications. This part concludes with a proposal to clarify that intercollegiate athletics should remain fully exempt from federal income taxation.
Date of Publication:
Mark D. Bauer, Department Stores on Sale: An Antitrust Quandary, 26 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 255 (2010)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Elizabeth Berenguer, Deadly Combinations: How Self-Defense Laws Pairing Immunity with a Presumption of Fear Allow Criminals to Get Away with Murder, 34 Am. J. Trial Advoc. 105 (2010)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
This Article identifies as problematic the intersection of Florida’s Immunity Statute and its current Castle Doctrine, which presumes reasonable fear where one acts in self-defense in the “castle.” The coupling together of immunity and the presumption of reasonable fear creates a bar to prosecution in Castle self-defense cases. The Article addresses problems associated with the lack of guidelines to ensure the equal application of the law to self-defense cases, and the lack of procedural tools available for the assertion of immunity arising from a self-defense act.
Date of Publication:
Elizabeth Ippolito Boals, State v. Peyton: Case File and Teaching Guide (1st ed., NITA, 2010)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Paul Boudreaux, Time Machine: Emma’s Legal Education, 59 J. Legal Educ. 454 (2010)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Brooke J. Bowman and Coleen M. Barger, The ALWD Companion: A Citation Practice Book (Aspen Publishers, 2010)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Brooke J. Bowman and Coleen M. Barger, Teacher’s Manual, The ALWD Companion: A Citation Practice Book (Aspen Publishers, 2010)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.
Date of Publication:
Catherine J. Cameron, Fixing FOIA: Pushing Congress to Amend FOIA Section B(3) to Require Congress to Explicitly Indicate an Intent to Exempt Records from FOIA in New Legislation, 28 Quinnipiac L. Rev. 855 (2010)Clicking on the button will copy the full recommended citation.