Kaytie Hobbs, Blog Chair, University of Cincinnati Law Review The Supreme Court is spending these hot June days handing down decision from its 2018 term. This blog post surveys a few of the more interesting holdings so far: Gamble v. United States[1] Held: Dual-sovereignty doctrine is upheld, allowing states and the federal government to prosecute... Continue Reading →
“Costanza Defense” Potentially No Longer Applicable in Class Action Securities Claims
Author: Collin L. Ryan, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review George Costanza once imparted to Jerry Seinfeld the infamous advice, “It’s not a lie, if you believe it.”[1] Although this advice is entertaining, the Supreme Court granted certiorari last March to resolve a circuit split regarding the extent to which Mr. Costanza’s advice applies... Continue Reading →
Alice Kills: Is Alice v. CLS the Destruction of Software and Business Method Patents as We Know Them?
Author: Ashley Clever, Contributing Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review This is a question many practicing patent attorneys are wondering in the wake of the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Alice Corporation PTY. LTD. v. CLS Bank International on June 19, 2014.[1] In Alice v. CLS, the Supreme Court invalidated four patents owned by... Continue Reading →
Conflict of Laws and Property Rights in the Age of “Semi-Legal” Same-Sex Marriages
Author: Ryan Goellner, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review In the United States federalist system, fifty different states often arrive at fifty different conclusions of law that can conflict not only with each other but also with federal law. The Supremacy Clause usually allows for the resolution of the latter conflicts, whereas conflicts among... Continue Reading →
The New Batson Challenge: Extending the Protections of Batson v. Kentucky to Gays and Lesbians
Author: Ryan Goellner, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review A contract dispute between two manufacturers of an AIDS drug has presented the opportunity for federal courts to protect gays and lesbians from being struck from juries because of their sexual orientation. Last month a panel for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral... Continue Reading →
Nassar’s Silver Lining
Author: Sandra F. Sperino, Professor of Law, University of Cincinnati College of Law In late June of 2013, the Supreme Court decided University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar.[1] The Court held that plaintiffs proceeding on a Title VII retaliation claim must establish their protected activity was the “but for” cause of an employment... Continue Reading →