Ryan Williams suggests a new approach to Supreme Court plurality precedent that promises to constrain lower courts’ decision-making while identifying a domain of bounded discretion in which they remain free to work through unanswered questions. “Questioning Marks: Plurality Decisions and Precedential Constraint” appeared in Stanford Law Review.
Diane Ring, in her Brigham Young University Law Review article “Developing Countries in an Age of Transparency and Disclosure,” explores the impact of transparency and disclosure trends from the perspective of developing countries, highlights benefits and risks, and identifies factors that will determine whether participating in the initiatives will be helpful or harmful.
David Olson published “Removing the Troll from the Thicket” in Florida Law Review in which he proposes a solution to the abuse of large patent portfolios by “patent trolls” and firms that commercialize patents. He argues that multiplying patent maintenance fees based on the size of a portfolio would incentivize holders to determine the patents’ value and let low-value patents lapse.
Mark Brodin (with Subrin, Minow, Main, and Lahav) published the fifth edition of Civil Procedure: Doctrine, Practice, and Content. An all-in-one learning solution, the textbook is widely used and respected for its well-written introduction, its cases, and its clear explanations of the doctrine, supported by comments that deepen students’ understanding of key concepts.