Works by the Law Students

Wilson, John S. 2008-11-07T20:32:23Z 2008-11-07T20:32:23Z 2008 86 Or. L. Rev.1201 (2008) 0196-2043 http://hdl.handle.net/1794/7722 40 p. This Comment argues that traditional legal rules are generally ineffective in addressing the new challenges that electronic evidence poses and that such challenges require new solutions. Many of the lessons learned from the increased use of electronic evidence in civil litigation-- "e-discovery," in the parlance of litigators-- may be applied to the burgeoning use of social-networking sites to gather evidence in criminal cases. This Comment also suggests some shortfalls in the newly revised Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governing e-discovery and offers suggestions for closing existing loopholes. en_US University of Oregon School of Law Electronic evidence Evidence (Law) Oregon Law Review : Vol. 86 No. 4, p.1201-1240 : MySpace, Your Space, or Our Space? New Frontiers in Electronic Evidence MySpace, Your Space, or Our Space? New Frontiers in Electronic Evidence [ARTICLE TITLE] Article

Brown, Kassandra A. 2008-10-10T17:30:34Z 2008-10-10T17:30:34Z 2008-10-10T17:30:34Z http://hdl.handle.net/1794/7438 Written by Ocean and Coastal Law Center student research assistant Kassandra A. Brown (J.D., University of Oregon School of Law, 2003) under the direction of Professor Richard G. Hildreth and with editorial assistance from Center librarian Andrea G. Coffman. This paper addresses some current federal and state legal authorities that may serve as a framework for establishing transboundary MPAs (MPAs across both federal and state waters) off the Oregon coast, makes some initial recommendations for that process, and contextualizes proposed Oregon legislation establishing a "Heceta-Stonewall Banks Marine Protected Area." Ocean and Coastal Law Center, School of Law, University of Oregon 2314728 bytes application/pdf en_US Ocean and Coastal Law Center Research Paper No. 1 Marine protected areas -- Oregon Oregon Coast Heceta-Stonewall Banks Marine Protected Area (Or.) MPAs Marine Protected Areas off the Coast of Oregon: Legal Framework, Initial Recommendations, and Proposed Oregon Legislation Establishing a Heceta-Stonewall Banks Marine Protected Area Other

Wood, Alexander 2008-07-30T16:59:00Z 2008-07-30T16:59:00Z 2008 23 J. ENVTL. L. & LITIG. 241 (2008) 1049-0280 http://hdl.handle.net/1794/6976 34 p. A print copy of this title is available through the UO Libraries under the call number: LAW LIB. K 10 .O425 Within the context of water rights issues, this Note discusses how federal courts have analyzed Colorado River in deciding whether to exercise jurisdiction or abstain because of “exceptional circumstances.”8 Part I provides a brief overview of judicially created abstention doctrines. Part II discusses the tension among federal reserved water rights, the prior appropriation doctrine, and a state’s authority over allocating its own water. Part II also focuses on the reasons federal agencies may choose to assert water rights claims in federal court and how the McCarran Amendment has limited that choice. Part III describes the Colorado River decision in detail and analyzes how courts have applied and misapplied its doctrine when resolving water rights issues. Part IV examines the doctrine of prior exclusive jurisdiction, a narrow abstention exception focusing on situations where the court that originally adjudicated a water-rights determination, whether state or federal, would have exclusive jurisdiction over all subsequent adjudications concerning the same water body. Part V explains how Colorado River abstention and the prior exclusive jurisdiction doctrine connect in the realm of water rights conflicts. The Note concludes by providing a final assessment of the subject at hand. 168643 bytes application/pdf en_US University of Oregon School of Law Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 23, No. 1, p. 241-274 : Watering Down Federal Court Jurisdiction: What Role Do Federal Courts Play in Deciding Water Rights? Watering Down Federal Court Jurisdiction: What Role Do Federal Courts Play in Deciding Water Rights? Article