Look Policies: Can employers discriminate based on their physical attractiveness?

Author: Stephanie Scott, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review Companies with mandatory grooming or appearance standards for their employees have been under fire from society, celebrities, and the law for many years. One of the companies most known for discriminating against unattractive or overweight applicants is Abercrombie & Fitch. Consumers have been outraged that... Continue Reading →

Per Se Ban On Eyewitness Expert Testimony in Louisiana: Why the Court Should Grant Certiorari

Author: Gabriel Fletcher, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review On November 2, 2015, the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari to Darrill Henry in a Louisiana case concerning eyewitness expert testimony.[1] Louisiana has a per se ban on eyewitness expert testimony.[2] Eyewitness testimony is a key component of our criminal justice system; however, a per... Continue Reading →

Brady Evidence Suppression Claims: Should Courts Require Criminal Defendants to Exercise Due Diligence during Discovery?  

Author: Maxel Moreland, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review When a criminal defendant enters a court room, the court controls the future of that defendant’s liberty. With so much at stake, criminal trial procedures should not require criminal defendants to exert additional effort in procuring beneficial evidence when the prosecutor has already discovered such... Continue Reading →

To Employ(ee) or Not to Employ(ee): Are Uber Drivers Employees or Independent Contractors?

Author: Gabriel Fletcher, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review Uber drivers in the state of California are challenging Uber Technologies, Inc. (Uber) in a class action suit, arguing that they should be classified as employees instead of independent contractors.[1] The classification of Uber’s drivers will dictate the drivers’ rights and eligibility for employment related... Continue Reading →

Migratory Bird Act: What Does Taking Mean?

Author: Maxel Moreland, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) makes it unlawful to “take” protected migratory birds.[1] However, using two methods of statutory interpretation, a circuit split has developed over different definitions of “take” under the MBTA. The first, narrower interpretation from the Fifth Circuit must involve the... Continue Reading →

Up ↑

Skip to content