Professor Bruner Speaks at the University of Washington

April 17, 2015 Leave a comment
Prof. Christopher Bruner

Prof. Christopher Bruner

Washington and Lee Law Professor Christopher Bruner presented his current book project on the role of small jurisdictions in cross-border corporate and financial services at the University of Washington School of Law on Thursday, April 16.  Titled “Market-Dominant Small Jurisdictions in a Globalizing Financial World,” the workshop was a part of UW’s Faculty Colloquium Series.

Prof. Shannon Debates the Merits of “Issue Conflicts” in International Arbitration at the ASIL Annual Meeting

April 17, 2015 Leave a comment
Prof. Victoria Shannon

Prof. Victoria Shannon

On Thursday, April 9, Professor Victoria Shannon debated the merits of arbitrator disqualification due to “issue conflicts” during a session entitled “ASIL-ICCA Task Force on Issue Conflicts in International Arbitration: Briefing and Discussion” at the American Society of International Law (ASIL) Annual Meeting in Washington, DC.  The term “issue conflicts” refers to the increasing number of proposals to disqualify arbitrators in international arbitration disputes on the ground of bias arising from views expressed in prior decisions and scholarship. ASIL and the International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA) created a joint task force to explore the question of “issue conflicts” with the aim of developing some form of guidance for the international arbitration community. The Task Force has finalized its draft report, which is now posted on the websites of ASIL and ICCA for comments. This session at ASIL featured a mock debate about the merits of “issue conflicts” in which Professor Shannon served as one of the debaters.  The session also invited participants in the ASIL Annual Meeting to comment on and discuss the draft report.

Categories: Shannon, Victoria

Professor Seaman Publishes in the Virginia Law Review

April 14, 2015 Leave a comment
Prof. Christopher Seaman

Prof. Christopher Seaman

Washington and Lee law professor Christopher Seaman has just published a new article in the Virginia Law Review.  The article titled “The Case Against Federalizing Trade Secrecy” appears in volume 101 published in April 2015.

Download the full text of the article here.

From the abstract:

Trade secrecy is unique among the major intellectual property (IP) doctrines because it is governed primarily by state law. Recently, however, a number of influential actors — including legislators, academics, and organizations representing IP attorneys and owners — have proposed creating a private civil cause of action for trade secret misappropriation under federal law. Proponents assert that federalizing trade secrecy would provide numerous benefits, including substantive uniformity, the availability of a federal forum for misappropriation litigation, and the creation of a unified national regime governing IP rights.

This Article engages in the first systematic critique of the claim that federalizing trade secrecy is normatively desirable. Ultimately, it concludes that there are multiple reasons for trade secrecy to remain primarily the province of state law, including preservation of states’ ability to engage in limited experimentation regarding the scope of trade secret protection and federalization’s potential negative impact on the disclosure of patent-eligible inventions. Finally, it proposes an alternative approach — a modest expansion of federal courts’ jurisdiction over state law trade secret claims — that can help address the issue of trade secret theft without requiring outright federalization.

 

The Army Lawyer Republishes Professor MacDonnell’s Work in Anniversary Issue

April 13, 2015 Leave a comment
Tim MacDonnell

Prof. Time MacDonnell

Washington and Lee Law professor Timothy MacDonnell’s 2002 article,  “Military Commissions and Courts-Martial: A Brief Discussion of the Constitutional and Jurisdictional Distinctions Between the Two Courts” was republished in the 500th anniversary issue of The Army Lawyer.    The 500th anniversary issue was published in January 2015.  The editors acknowledge Professor MacDonnell’s work as “cited more frequently than any other appearing in this publication written by a judge advocate.”

The full text of the article may be found in the Army Lawyer here.

Professor Shannon Presents on Third-Party Funding at William & Mary Law School

April 3, 2015 Leave a comment
Prof. Victoria Shannon

Prof. Victoria Shannon

On Tuesday, March 31, 2015, Professor Victoria Shannon presented her article, Judging Third-Party Funding, 63 UCLA L. Rev __ (2016) (forthcoming), at William & Mary Law School as part of the Junior Faculty Exchange Program.  Professor Shannon’s article provides guidance to judges and arbitrators regarding how to reinterpret the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, evidentiary privileges, and international arbitration procedures in light of third-party funding. By interpreting the existing rules as suggested in this Article, judges and arbitrators will be able to gain a better sense of the prevalence, structures, and impact of third-party funding and its effects (if any) on dispute resolution procedures. Over time, these observations will reveal the true systemic impact of third-party funding and contribute to developing robust third-party funding regulations.  The current draft is available here.

 

Read more about Professor Shannon’s scholarship here.

Professor MacDonnell publishes new article in Virginia Journal of Criminal Law

April 2, 2015 Leave a comment
Tim MacDonnell

Prof. Time MacDonnell

Washington and Lee law professor Timothy McDonnell published a new article in the Virginia Journal of Criminal Law.  The article, “Justice Scalia’s Fourth Amendment: Text, Context, Clarity, and Occasional Faint-Hearted Originalism”, appears in volume three, issue one of the journal.

Read the full text of the article here.

From the abstract:

Since joining the United States Supreme Court in 1986, Justice Scalia has been a prominent voice on the Fourth Amendment, having written twenty majority opinions, twelve concurrences, and six dissents on the topic. Under his pen, the Court has altered its test for determining when the Fourth Amendment should apply; provided a vision to address technology’s encroachment on privacy; and articulated the standard for determining whether government officials are entitled to qualified immunity in civil suits involving alleged Fourth Amendment violations. In most of Justice Scalia’s opinions, he has championed an originalist/textualist theory of constitutional interpretation. Based on that theory, he has advocated that the text and context of the Fourth Amendment should govern how the Court interprets most questions of search and seizure law. His Fourth Amendment opinions have also included an emphasis on clear, bright-line rules that can be applied broadly to Fourth Amendment questions. However, there are Fourth Amendment opinions in which Justice Scalia has strayed from his originalist/textualist commitments, particularly in the areas of the special needs doctrine and qualified immunity. This article asserts that Justice Scalia’s non-originalist approach in these spheres threatens the cohesiveness of his Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, and could, if not corrected, unbalance the interpretation of the Fourth Amendment in favor of law enforcement interests.

Professor Michelle Drumbl Interviewed for WalletHub.com

April 1, 2015 Leave a comment
Prof. Michelle Drumbl

Prof. Michelle Drumbl

Washington and Lee law professor and director of the Tax Clinic was recently interviewed by John S. Keirnan of WalletHub.com.   Professor Drumbl provides expert advise to accompany an article titled “What to Do if You Can’t Pay Your Taxes.”  In the interview she discusses avoiding penalties for failing to file returns and the advantages of an installment plan over tapping other sources of funds to pay a tax liability.

Learn more from the press release here. 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 305 other followers