Category: Law Rev Contents

0

UC Davis Law Review, Issue 51:1 (November 2017)

Symposium — Future-Proofing Law: From rDNA to Robots

Future-Proofing Law
Anupam Chander

A Simpler World? On Pruning Risks and Harvesting Fruits in an Orchard of Whispering Algorithms
Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar

The Real Law of Virtual Reality
Mark A. Lemley & Eugene Volokh

The Governance of Data and Data Flows in Trade Agreements: The Pitfalls of Legal Adaptation
Mira Burri

Law for the Platform Economy
Julie E. Cohen

Mismatched Regulation: Genetically Modified Mosquitoes and the Coordinated Framework for Biotechnology
Albert C. Lin

Resilience: A New Tool in the Risk Governance Toolbox for Emerging Technologies
Gary E. Marchant & Yvonne A. Stevens

Notes

Effectuating the Benefits of the Twombly Plausibility Standard in Patent Infringement Cases: Application of Rule 9 Post-Abrogation of Rule 84
Elizabeth Chang

The Forced Choice of Dignified Disposal: Government Mandate of Interment or Cremation of Fetal Remains
Elizabeth Kimball Key

Privacy and Criminal Certainty: A New Approach to the Application of the Private Search Doctrine to Electronic Storage Devices
Joseph Little

lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu

1

University of Toronto Law Journal – Volume 67, Number 3 (Summer 2017)

University of Toronto Law Journal- Volume 67, Number 3 (Summer 2017)

ARTICLES
Deliberative freedoms and the asymmetric features of anti-discrimination law
Colin Campbell, Dale Smith

A right to deliberative freedom: Reply to Campbell and Smith
Sophia Reibetanz Moreau

Destination-based cash-flow taxation: A critical appraisal
Wei Cui

Decomposing Bhasin v Hrynew : Towards an institutional understanding of the general organizing principle of good faith in contractual performance
Daniele Bertolini

BOOK REVIEW
ABRAHAM DRASSINOWER What’s Wrong with Copying?
Shyamkrishna Balganesh

Full text of the University of Toronto Law Journal is available online at UTLJ Online, Project Muse, JSTOR, HeinOnline, Westlaw, Westlaw-CARSWELL, LexisNexis and Quicklaw.

0

UC Davis Law Review, Issue 50:5 (June 2017)

Articles

Wrongful Benefit & Arctic Drilling
Nicolas Cornell & Sarah E. Light

The Materiality of Sponsorship Confusion
Matthew B. Kugler

When Patents Claim Preexisting Knowledge
Sean B. Seymore

Choosing Marriage
Kaiponanea T. Matsumura

The Absurdity of Crime-Based Deportation
Kari Hong

Amending Patent Eligibility
David O. Taylor

Reconceptualizing the Whistleblower’s Dilemma
Miriam H. Baer

Note

Penalties and Reasonable Cause: Have You Exercised Ordinary Business Care and Prudence?
Russell A. Sternshein

lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu

0

UC Davis Law Review, Issue 50:4 (April 2017)

Articles

Who Counts for One Person, One Vote?
Nathaniel Persily

The Interaction of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act After Young v. UPS
Deborah A. Widiss

Stitches for Snitches: Lawyers as Whistleblowers
Dennis J. Ventry, Jr.

Water and Taxes
Dave Owen

McDonnell and Anti-Corruption’s Last Stand
Jacob Eisler

Performative Privacy
Scott Skinner-Thompson

The First Amendment Right to a Remedy
Benjamin Plener Cover

Note

Trust and Antitrust: State-Based Restrictions in Telemedicine
Wynter K. Miller

lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu

0

University of Toronto Law Journal – Volume 67, Number 2 (Spring 2017)

University of Toronto Law Journal- Volume 67, Number 2 (Spring 2017)

FOCUS FEATURE: DISSENT

Editor’s note
David Dyzenhaus

The idea for this Focus Feature arose from a panel at the Appellate Courts Seminar in Toronto, organized by the National Judicial Institute in January 2016. There, Peter Hogg presented the argument of the first paper in this feature, and that was followed by a discussion between the two judges featured here, in which they answered the questions that are posed in their papers. As this seemed to me to be a most enlightening set of exchanges, I asked the participants to revise their papers for publication as a Focus Feature, and I also invited two academic colleagues who work on dissents to add their thoughts in a paper that would react to the first three. I thank the National Judicial Institute and all the authors for their contributions.

Why judges should dissent
Peter W Hogg and Ravi Amarnath

The role of dissents in appellate judging
Freda M Steel

‘Writing separately’
Robert G Richards

Ten theses on dissent
Marie-Claire Belleau and Rebecca Johnson

ARTICLES
Against racial profiling
Amit Pundik

Commodification and the allocation of care and responsibility for children
Wanda Wiegers

Full text of the University of Toronto Law Journal is available online at UTLJ Online, Project Muse, JSTOR, HeinOnline, Westlaw, Westlaw-CARSWELL, LexisNexis and Quicklaw.

0

UC Davis Law Review, Issue 50:3 (February 2017)

Articles

Justice Visualized: Courts and the Body Camera Revolution
Mary D. Fan

Implementing Proportionality
Perry L. Moriearty

Judging Immigration Equity: Deportation and Proportionality in the Supreme Court
Jason A. Cade

Analyzing Social Impairments Under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act
Susan D. Carle

How Big Data Can Increase Originalism’s Methodological Rigor: Using Corpus Linguistics to Reveal Original Language Conventions
Lee J. Strang

Papers from the Conference on California Agriculture: Water, Labor, and Immigration

Some Reflections on Contemporary Issues in California Farm Labor
William B. Gould IV

The Power of a Presumption: California as a Laboratory for Unauthorized Immigrant Workers’ Rights
Kati L. Griffith

Notes

Vindication of Federal Statutory Rights: The Future of Cost-Based Challenges to Arbitration Clauses After American Express v. Italian Colors Restaurant and Green Tree v. Randolph
Olga Bykov

Policing Reasonable Accommodations for Individuals with Disabilities
Kelley B. Harrington

lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu

0

University of Toronto Law Journal – Volume 67, Number 1, Winter 2017

ARTICLES

The Moral Unity Of Public Law
T.R.S. Allan

De-Ciphering Self-Help
Zoë Sinel

The Puzzle Of Intra-Familial Commodification
Ram Rivlin

BOOK REVIEW

False Security: The Radicalization of Canadian Anti-Terrorism by Craig Forcese and Kent Roach
Robert Diab

REVIEW ESSAY

How to end mass imprisonment: The legal and cultural strategies of Bryan Stevenson
Lisa Kerr

Full text of the University of Toronto Law Journal is available online at UTLJ Online, Project Muse, JSTOR, HeinOnline, Westlaw, Westlaw-CARSWELL, LexisNexis and Quicklaw.

0

UC Davis Law Review, Issue 50:2 (December 2016)

Symposium — Disjointed Regulation: State Efforts to Legalize Marijuana

Keynote Speech — The Surprising Collapse of Marijuana Prohibition: What Now?
Richard J. Bonnie

Marijuana Legalization and Horizontal Federalism
Brianne J. Gorod

Legal Cannabis in the U.S.: Not Whether but How?
Sam Kamin

Tax Benefits of Government-Owned Marijuana Stores
Benjamin M. Leff

The Colors of Cannabis: Race and Marijuana
Steven W. Bender

The Economics of Workplace Drug Testing
Jeremy Kidd, Ph.D.

Marijuana Legalization and Pretextual Stops
Alex Kreit

Legalizing Marijuana and Abating Environmental Harm: An Overblown Promise?
Michael Vitiello

Drug War and Peace
Erik Luna

lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu

1

University of Toronto Law Journal – Volume 66, Number 4, Fall 2016

utlj-logo

University of Toronto Law Journal – Volume 66, Number 4, Fall 2016

FOCUS FEATURE: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, BIG DATA, AND THE FUTURE OF LAW

In this Focus Feature, we argue that machines will perform many of the tasks currently performed by lawmakers, judges, and lawyers. However, rather than offer a dystopian vision of a legal world run by machines, we suggest that the changes will be mostly beneficial. … Anthony Casey and Anthony Niblett explore how the dichotomy of rules and standards will vanish in a world of such vast information. Rules are simplistic and precise, but they are rarely ideal because they do not factor in particular circumstances. They are often too strict or too loose. Standards are vague and create costly legal uncertainty and risk aversion. …  Benjamin Alarie explores the transition from an analogue world with slow and costly communication to a digitally connected world with real time and nearly costless communication, and he predicts that it will bring with it significant societal advantages. In the long run, Alarie predicts the advent of ‘legal singularity.’ With the realization of legal singularity, a complete specification of tax law (and, indeed, all of the other areas of law) is predicted. …  Albert Yoon argues that the technology will augment, rather than replace, lawyers. Lawyers will need to adapt as particular tasks become automated. Yoon argues that in the same way that electronic spreadsheets changed the nature of accounting, the effect of augmenting technologies will be a net positive for the legal services industry. Innovative law firms will be able to provide cheaper, faster, and more accurate legal advice. (excerpt from “Law in the future”)

Law in the future
Benjamin Alarie, Anthony Niblett, and Albert H Yoon

Self-driving laws
Anthony J Casey and Anthony Niblett

The path of the law: Towards legal singularity
Benjamin Alarie

The post-modern lawyer: Technology and the democratization of legal representation
Albert H Yoon

ARTICLES
Acquisitive prescription and fundamental rights
Neil Duxbury

Rethinking original ownership
Yael R Lifshitz

Quantifying Dunsmuir: An empirical analysis of the Supreme Court of Canada’s jurisprudence on standard of review
Robert Danay

Full text of the University of Toronto Law Journal is available online at UTLJ Online, Project Muse, JSTOR, HeinOnline, Westlaw, Westlaw-CARSWELL, LexisNexis and Quicklaw.

0

UC Davis Law Review, Issue 50:1 (November 2016)

Articles

Miranda 2.0
Tonja Jacobi

Unearthing Summary Judgment’s Concealed Standard of Review
Jonathan Remy Nash

The Hostile Poison Pill
Christine Hurt

Bad Medicine: Parents, the State, and the Charge of “Medical Child Abuse”
Maxine Eichner

Externality Entrepreneurism
Lisa Grow Sun & Brigham Daniels

Conspiracy as Contract
Laurent Sacharoff

Appealing to Congress
Justin Collings

Note

The Electronic “Sign-in-Wrap” Contract: Issues of Notice and Assent, the Average Internet User Standard, and Unconscionability
Erin Canino

lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu