Nbr. 16, January 2011
> SIGN UP FREE
- The limits of "extraordinary power": a survey of first-degree murder appeals under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 278, Section 33E.
- Lights, camera, mistrial: conflicting federal court local rules and conflicting theories on the aggregate effect of cameras on courtroom proceedings.
- Work product protection, tax accrual documents, and United States v. Textron, Inc.: why the First Circuit got it right for the wrong reasons.
- Evidence of ambiguity: the effect of circuit splits on the interpretation of federal criminal law.
- Rethinking the additur question in federal courts.
- State secrets are a privilege, not a right: can foreign victims of extraordinary rendition and torture overcome the state secrets privilege using the alien tort statute?
- Arbitration--United States Supreme Court sounds the death knell for class arbitration--Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int'l Corp., 130 S. CT. 1758 (2010).
- Civil procedure--Supreme Court's Vaden decision regarding federal question jurisdiction does not apply to diversity jurisdiction--Northport Health Services of Arkansas, LLC v. Rutherford, 605 F.3d 483 (8th Cir. 2010).
- Determining self-employment income for child support purposes: the Massachusetts view compared with the national view.
- Leading by example: why the First Circuit should adopt a medical peer-review privilege.
- The testimonial nature of multidisciplinary team interviews in Massachusetts: applying Crawford to the child declarant.
- The naked truth: an in-depth look into the question of hearsay admissibility at probation violation hearings in Massachusetts, the application of Rule 6, and what it all means for the future of the Massachusetts probation system.
- Civil procedure--intra-military immunity doctrine applies to dual status technicians--Zuress v. Donley, 606 F.3d 1249 (9th Cir. 2010).
- Constitutional law--permitting blanket strip-search policies for all arrestees entering general jail population--Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of Burlington County, 621 F.3d 296 (3d Cir. 2010).
- Tort damages--medical provider's charges and range of payments accepted for services rendered is admissible under section 79G--Law v. Griffith, 930 N.E.2d 126 (Mass. 2010).
- Civil procedure--supplemental jurisdiction and the expansion of the independent basis for subject matter jurisdiction requirement--Global Naps, Inc. v. Verizon New England, Inc., 603 F.3d 71 (1st Cir. 2010).