Most legal educators would agree that legal writing is a critical component of a law school’s curriculum. While historically inconsequential, legal writing courses have become increasingly important to the educational mission of academia for at least three reasons. First, legal educators better recognize the value of professional skills, including legal writing, research, and analysis. Second, legal educators better appreciate the relationship between legal thought and legal writing in both doctrinal and practice-oriented courses. Third, legal educators better understand that legal writing courses teach the methodology of legal problem-solving and therefore compliment doctrinal courses and the law school’s academic mission.
Page 4 of 6
Imagine that a fugitive on the run from Florida Department of Law Enforcement agents confronts a parish priest in Clearwater and begs for shelter from his pursuers. He claims that he is innocent of the crime for which they accuse him and swears that the agents are pursuing him for personal reasons. He fearfully tells the priest that the agents will kill him if they apprehend him, because he knows something that they do not want released to the media. As the priest and the fugitive speak in hushed tones in front of the altar, a police car screeches to a halt outside the church. The priest bids his charge to wait and steps outside, securing the door behind him. He confronts the officers and tells them not to enter and take the man by force. The priest has given him sanctuary in God’s house. Now what happens? Can the officers push the priest aside, break down the church door, and apprehend the fugitive as he cowers in front of the altar? Can the fugitive take refuge inside the church and escape secular justice when he may in fact be guilty of the crime of which the government accuses him? What about the priest? Does he not have the right to practice his religion, which commands that he help those in need? This Comment will consider these questions.
No child’s birthday party would be complete without playing the amusing game, “pin the tail on the donkey.” Although I stopped playing that game years ago, it seems that federal circuits all over this country are taking jurors, blindfolding them with bad science, spinning them around in a maze of experts, and sending them off in any direction to deliberate and pin a verdict on the truth. Because it is analogous to pinning a tail on a donkey, polygraph evidence has always been a legal Pandora’s box, serving only to disable and disrupt the truth finding process. Accordingly, this Comment advocates excluding polygraph evidence from federal criminal courtrooms and allowing juries to perform their constitutional duty.
This country begins the twenty-first century with the legal presumption that everyone is entitled to equal opportunities to gain access to the workplace. Yet, numerous sectors of the workplace remain dominated by a single group. Disparities in the workplace are ever present. However, some courts now apply the very statute that entitled minorities to an equal opportunity to compete in a way that ensures employers will not be permitted to make decisions in recognition of this country’s past insidious treatment of economically disfavored groups. Because courts have closed their eyes to the underlying intent of Title VII, they have relieved the employer of its duty to strive for equality within the workplace.
To effectuate the competing interests of Title VII, courts must fashion a test that does not punish employers for acknowledging disparities in the workplace, which they played a predominant role in creating. Courts should determine that when an employer hires a qualified minority over a qualified majority member plaintiff, the employer should be required to present only evidence sufficient to establish that the minority hired was qualified for the position and the employer followed its own hiring procedures. This standard acknowledges the history of Title VII and requires an employer to demonstrate that it followed its own hiring procedures and hired someone who fit the qualifications of the position. To demonstrate why a different standard should apply to a majority member bringing a Title VII claim, this Comment will examine the historical background of Title VII and the Supreme Court’s varied interpretations of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Act), as amended.
The oldest and most respected privilege known to the legal profession is the attorney-client privilege. The confidentiality inherent in the privilege lies at the heart of the American judicial system. It is well accepted and generally understood that communications between an attorney and an individual client are confidential. Confidentiality encourages people to seek legal assistance early and promotes commnication between the attorney and the client. Only when the attorney receives full and frank information from the client can the proper legal opinion be formed and advice rendered to the client.
In the nineteenth century, the term “law of storms” described rules of navigation, which, when followed, would allow a sailing vessel to avoid the most dangerous and violent parts of a hurricane. Like the nineteenth century mariners, twenty-first century local governments confront challenges from natural and man-made disasters and might benefit from a discussion of the applicable law under which they will have to navigate through such disasters. Indeed, leading climatologists predict an increase in the number and severity of hurricanes in the coming decades. “Florida is more susceptible to hurricanes than any other state.” Because of Florida’s population concentrations, hurricanes threaten the safety of large numbers of people and have the potential to cause extensive property damage. Florida also is threatened by wildfires, which result from a dangerous combination of droughts and lightning. Local governments must act exigently to protect their citizens from the threat of hurricanes and wildfires and the havoc they cause.
The simple phrase “as is” is widely used in today’s transactional society. But what exactly is “as is?” More specifically, what are the legal effects in Florida of including “as is” language in a contract, and how does “as is” impact different causes of action in Florida? This Article answers these questions and their permutations by compiling and analyzing the numerous Florida cases that have construed “as is” provisions.
After some groundbreaking years throughout the 1980s and 1990s, land use law in Florida has seen a slow down in dramatic legal developments. The last few years have solidified established principles through continued application to new fact patterns. The end of the last decade saw a number of courts apply existing law at the furthest boundaries of existing principles. Some encroaching inconsistencies are beginning to call for Florida Supreme Court consideration or legislative adjustment, but in great part, the cases have produced predictable results based on known standards. Perhaps the newest development is judicial expectation that the land use community readily will understand and properly apply the legal principles in this field.
It has been fifteen years since the Florida legislature ushered in a new growth management era by enacting major amendments
to Florida’s Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act (Planning Act). The 1985 Planning Act amendments restructured and revised the methods whereby local governments manage the unremitting growth pressures created by an expanding population. They also updated the requirements for the content of local government comprehensive plans. The state land planning agency, the Florida Department of Community Affairs (FLDCA), was directed to flesh out the content requirements through an administrative rule that the legislature subsequently reviewed. For the first time, local governments were required to implement their plans through land development regulations. The experience gained from the application of this new law has led the Author to conclude that major changes, outlined in later sections of this Essay, are necessary for the full potential of comprehensive planning to be achieved.
Consider this problem:
You are a practicing attorney and a member of the audit committee for a large, publicly held corporation, XYZ. One evening, you receive a telephone call from the chief financial officer of XYZ, and she sounds quite distressed. She explains that she has discovered that the corporation has been materially overstating its assets for the last three quarters. As a result, XYZ has published misleading information in its recent annual financial report. She warns you that this will result in a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation, as well as shareholder class action lawsuits.
After the initial shock disappears, you start thinking about the possibility that you will be subject to liability because of your position on the audit committee. You think back over the last year and remember when you were asked to become a member of the audit committee. The company chose you to serve on the committee because of your accounting background (you have an undergraduate degree in accounting) and your status as an outside director. You knew that the job would include more responsibilities than you already had, but you were ready to accept the challenge. As you understood, it would be your duty to monitor the internal financial reporting process as well as to communicate with the external auditors.