2024-03-28T14:31:02Zhttps://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/oai/requestoai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/113132015-06-17T20:15:28Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_11306
00925njm 22002777a 4500
dc
Nicholls, Jennifer
author
2011
This Comment begins by looking at the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure relating to discovery, the purpose and goals of discovery,
as well as the three primary federal limitations on discovery, with a
particular emphasis on the Proportionality Rule and its needed
limitations on discovery, particularly in light of e-discovery. Next,
this Comment will examine discovery rules in Oregon, the goals of
discovery in Oregon, Oregon’s two limitations on discovery, and,
finally, the conspicuous absence of the Proportionality Rule. This
Comment concludes with a call for the Proportionality Rule to be
adopted in Oregon because it is consistent with both the goals of the
Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure (ORCP) and the purpose of
discovery in civil litigation, and, additionally, it is a needed limitation
given the profound impact e-discovery has and will continue to have
on litigation in this state.
89 Or. L. Rev. 1445 (2011)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/11313
Civil procedure -- Oregon
Oregon Law Review : Vol. 89, No. 4, p. 1445-1474 : A Proportional Response: Amending the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure to Minimize Abusive Discovery Practices
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/113092015-06-17T12:36:16Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_11306
00925njm 22002777a 4500
dc
Asbury, Bret D.
author
2011
In recent years, a troubling trend has emerged within a number of
poor, black communities. Termed “Stop Snitching,” it has manifested
itself in the form of community members’ refusing to cooperate with
police investigations of community crimes. The result of this
widespread refusal to cooperate has been a reduced number of crimes
solved within these communities; without cooperating witnesses, it
has proven exceedingly difficult for police to make criminal cases. This Article suggests a different understanding of Stop Snitching,
arguing that poor, black community members’ refusal to cooperate
with police investigations should be viewed as neither ethically
condemnable nor inexplicable, but rather as a natural extension of the
innate human aspiration to be loyal. It does so by situating Stop
Snitching within the existing literature on loyalty and asserting that
the refusal to cooperate with police represents a privileging of
community loyalty over loyalty to the state. Throughout the various
strata of contemporary society, such privileging of the familiar over
the remote is common, and Stop Snitching is neither puzzling nor
reprehensible when viewed as a manifestation of this manner of
prioritization.
Once Stop Snitching is understood as a reflection of the weak
loyalty bonds that exist between police officers and the poor, black
communities they serve, it becomes clear that it can be curtailed and
ultimately eliminated only through police efforts aimed atstrengthening these bonds. This Article closes with a discussion of
the steps police should take in order to succeed in this regard.
89 Or. L. Rev. 1257 (2011)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/11309
Oregon Law Review : Vol. 89, No. 4, p.1257-1312 : Anti-Snitching Norms and Community Loyalty
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/113112015-06-17T12:47:25Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_11306
00925njm 22002777a 4500
dc
Nagle, John Copeland
author
2011
This Article examines how the law is being asked to adjudicate
disputed sights in the context of the Mojave Desert. The Mojave is
the best-known and most explored desert in the United States. For
many people, though, the Mojave is missing from any list of
America’s scenic wonders. The evolution in thinking about the
Mojave’s aesthetics takes places in two acts. In the first act, covering
the period from the nineteenth century to 1994, what began as a
curious voice praising the desert’s scenery developed into a powerful
movement that prompted Congress to enact the California Desert
Protection Act (CDPA) of 1994. The second
act begins around 2005, when the nation’s energy policy again turned
to the potential of renewable energy. The Mojave is an obvious
location for large-scale solar energy development, but supposedly
green technology threatens many of the scenic values that Congress
decided to protect in the CDPA.
89 Or. L. Rev. 1357 (2011)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/11311
Mojave Desert
United States. California Desert Protection Act of 1994
California Desert Protection Act of 1994
Oregon Law Review : Vol. 89, No. 4, p.1357-1406 : See the Mojave!
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/113102013-04-10T09:01:23Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_11306
00925njm 22002777a 4500
dc
Trachtenberg, Ben
author
2011
This Article presents two new arguments against “discounting”
future human lives during cost-benefit analysis, arguing that even
absent ethical objections to the disparate treatment of present and
future humanity, the economic calculations of cost-benefit analysis
itself—if properly performed—counsel against discounting lives at
anything close to current rates. In other words, even if society sets
aside all concerns with the discounting of future generations in
principle, current discounting of future human lives cannot be
justified even on the discounters’ own terms. First, because cost-benefit
analysis has thus far ignored evidence of rising health care
expenditures, it underestimates the “willingness to pay” for health and
safety that future citizens will likely exhibit, thereby undervaluing
their lives. Second, cost-benefit analysis ignores the trend of
improved material conditions in developed countries. As time
advances, residents of rich countries tend to live better and spend
more, meaning that a strict economic monetization of future persons
values the lives of our expected descendents above those of present
citizens. These two factors justify “inflation” of future lives that
would offset, perhaps completely, the discount rate used for human
life. Until regulators correct their method of discounting the benefits
of saving human lives in the future, the United States will continue to
suffer the fatal costs of under-regulation, and agencies will remain in
violation of legal requirements to maximize net benefits.
89 Or. L. Rev. 1313 (2011)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/11310
Oregon Law Review : Vol. 89, No. 4, p. 1313-1356 : Health Inflation, Wealth Inflation, and the Discounting of Human Life
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/113082015-06-17T12:47:29Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_11306
00925njm 22002777a 4500
dc
Templin, Benjamin A.
author
2011
This Article reassesses the policy option of increasing the
retirement age, considering recently published studies on longevity,
capacity to work, labor force participation, and poverty rates.
Additionally, the Article considers recent work in behavioral
economics in order to craft policy initiatives that result in a secure
retirement. Part I of this Article analyzes the funding crisis facing
Social Security and puts it into the context of the larger budget
challenges facing the federal government. Part II discusses the
history of retirement age provisions in the Social Security Act and
presents a descriptive analysis of the current law. Part III considers
the main arguments—pro and con—concerning the retirement age as well as an analysis of values that should guide reform. The extent to
which the Social Security deficit is affected by various proposals is
discussed in Part IV, and Part V analyzes the economic effects on
workers. Employment trends and ability to work are analyzed in
Parts VI and VII, respectively. Last, policy recommendations are
made in Part VIII.
89 Or. L. Rev. 1179 (2011)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/11308
Social security
Oregon Law Review : Vol. 89, No. 4, p. 1179-1256 : Social Security Reform: Should the Retirement Age Be Increased?
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/113072015-06-17T12:47:31Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_11306
00925njm 22002777a 4500
dc
Dolgin, Janet L.
author
Dieterich, Katherine R.
author
2011
This Article focuses on the association between poverty
and obesity and the implications of that association for attitudes
toward health care reform. It suggests that alongside the nation’s
putative efforts to “fight” obesity sits a far less explicit attempt to
undermine that effort. And it suggests that a similar conflict underlies
the effort to mitigate poverty. These conflicts and the social tensions
they reflect must be revealed and examined in order to understand
fully the nation’s longstanding refusal, and its continuing reluctance,
to provide adequate health care coverage for everyone.
Part I considers America’s peculiar class system, comparing the
myth with the reality. It then explores the significance of that system
in explaining the nation’s hesitation about providing health care
coverage for everyone. Part II compares social assumptions about
poverty with social assumptions about obesity. This Part suggests
that the nation’s putative interest in ameliorating poverty and
“fighting” obesity is undermined by conflicting interests. Part III then
summarizes and offers an explanation of the 2010 health reform law’s
limited response to obesity discrimination and to discrimination based
on class. Finally, Part IV examines the implications of the nation’s
ambivalent response to expanding health care coverage, both before
and after passage of the 2010 health reform law. That ambivalence is
illustrated through reference to conflated images of poverty and
obesity.
89 Or. L. Rev. 1113 (2011)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/11307
Obesity
Health care reform
Oregon Law Review : Vol. 89, No. 4, p. 1113-1178 : Weighing Status: Obesity, Class, and Health Reform
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/113122015-06-17T20:16:30Zcom_1794_384com_1794_7551com_1794_7550com_1794_691com_1794_3786com_1794_7561col_1794_385col_1794_18789col_1794_11306
00925njm 22002777a 4500
dc
Lininger, Tom
author
2011
This essay explores whether Oregon should adopt the restyled
Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE), and if so, to what extent. Part I analyzes the most important
differences between the present versions of the Oregon
Evidence Code (OEC) and the FRE.
(This Part may be useful to students who need to memorize the
unique features of the OEC in order to prepare for the Oregon Bar
Exam.) Part II considers the primary reasons why the Oregon rules
have departed from the federal model over the last few decades. Part
III explores the advantages of adopting the restyled federal rules. Part
IV addresses the disadvantages of importing the restyled rules in the
OEC. Part V suggests one possible compromise that would preserve
the distinctive character of the OEC while benefiting from the
improvements to the FRE.
89 Or. L. Rev. 1407 (2011)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/11312
Evidence (Law)
Oregon Law Review : Vol. 89, No. 4, p. 1407-1444 : Should Oregon Adopt the New Federal Rules of Evidence?
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/113142015-06-17T20:16:26Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_11306
00925njm 22002777a 4500
dc
Trickett, Rachel D.
author
2011
Over the last few decades, states have responded to the controversy
of punitive damage windfalls by implementing numerous statutory
schemes that include caps on punitive damages and stringent burdens
of proof. Oregon’s split-recovery scheme, while effectively curbing
the problem of windfalls by allocating a portion to the State, has
resulted in a new controversy. The Supreme Court of Oregon’s
resolution of this controversy will have far-reaching effects.
However, the limits of the Oregon Legislature to grant the State
control over a plaintiff’s claim, the ample protections already
provided for the State’s interest in an ultimate award of punitive
damages, and the impracticalities of changing long-held principles of
the American judicial system all indicate that the parties to a case
need not obtain the State’s approval prior to settling a case.
89 Or. L. Rev. 1475 (2011)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/11314
Punitive damages
Exemplary damages
Oregon Law Review : Vol. 89, No. 4, p. 1475-1500 : Punitive Damages: The Controversy Continues