Skidaway Institute of Oceanography
DigitalCommons@University of Georgia School of LawNot a member yet
17912 research outputs found
Sort by
You Can’t Handle the Obvious: LKQ and Testing for Nonobviousness in Design Patents
Full text linkThis Note traces the change from the rigid Rosen-Durling test for obviousness in design patents, to the Graham analysis in light of KSR v. Teleflex. The history of obviousness inquiries supported a more flexible approach and thus made Rosen-Durling unsupportable as anomalous. However, in abandoning a functional, if stiff, test for obviousness, the Federal Circuit both clarifies and clutters the law around obviousness. This Note follows that change, makes sense of what it can, and humorously criticizes the ambiguities and circularity of the court’s opinion. Ultimately, the new test opens up design patents to a wider array of attacks. This may ultimately sound the death knell for an under-utilizes form of intellectual property protection
Pluralism in State Constitutional Law
Full text linkDebates over constitutional interpretation rage on—with most parties staking out preferred theories, their justifications, and assertions of their utility in predicting, explaining, and critiquing court opinions. The United States Constitution and the Supreme Court take center stage, despite a rich set of cases and constitutions at the state level. At the same time, state constitutional discussions tend to steer clear of federal interpretive theorizing.
This article seeks to bridge the gap between these literatures, arguing that state constitutional interpretation practices demonstrate a pluralist approach that may inform broader theoretical debates. State courts frequently employ different methods—sometimes explicitly, sometimes implicitly—both across different cases and within single cases. I taxonomize these pluralist approaches and argue that courts that explicitly recognize multiple theories of interpretation within single cases exemplify a level of candor and nuance often missing in federal cases and commentary. At the federal level, singular theories tend to be the focus, with pluralism drawing relatively few supporters—a state of affairs I argue should change in light of lessons derived from state constitutional interpretation
Rescuing State Punishment Clauses from the Deferential Doctrine
Full text linkA number of state appellate courts read any sentencing decisions by lower courts that are “within the statutory sentencing limits” as constitutional or presumptively constitutional under both the Eighth Amendment and the punishment clause in their state constitutions. This “deferential doctrine” ignores both the individual rights of criminal defendants and the role of state courts in placing some constitutional limit on the sentencing schemes adopted by state legislatures.
In an age of mass incarceration and excessive spending on punishment, this blind deference state courts show state legislatures should end. This article demonstrates how and why state courts should use the punishment clauses in their state constitutions as tools to limit draconian and unconstitutional punishment by recognizing the individual rights of criminal defendants.
Part II briefly recounts the doctrinal phenomenon of state courts reading their state constitutions as presumptively or completely deferring to state legislative sentencing schemes, rather than engaging with and placing state constitutional limits on state punishment practices. Part III explains the fundamental flaws with this common approach and the consequences of it. In Part IV, the article argues for an alternative doctrinal approach, one that uses state punishment clauses as a tool to police the regressive sentencing practices adopted by state legislatures. Finally, the article concludes by highlighting some of the positive effects of abandoning this unconstitutional deference to state sentencing statutes
State Constitutional Duty and Public Employee Speech
Full text linkPublic employees do not sacrifice their constitutional rights by accepting public employment, but the doctrines surrounding public employee constitutional rights present a unique amalgam of rights and duties. Nowhere is this amalgam clearer than in the doctrine of public employee free speech. Under the federal Constitution’s First Amendment, public employees, notwithstanding their government roles, may speak out as citizens on matters of public concern, and any restrictions a government employer places on that speech must be justified by compelling workplace concerns that outweigh the speech interests of the employee and the interests of the public in access to relevant information.
About two decades ago, the U.S. Supreme Court placed a limitation on this right to speak. Under the Court’s decision in Garcetti v. Ceballos, a public employee cannot claim First Amendment protection over speech the employee makes “pursuant to their official duties.” Although its later decision in Lane v. Franks clarified that this exception extends only to job-required expression, the exception nevertheless may extend much further.
The article proceeds through four Parts. Part II briefly outlines the federal constitutional doctrines of public employee speech. Parts III and IV examine the text and history of the fifty state constitutions, the overlap that exists among them, and what appears to be a deeper set of protections than in the federal Constitution—one more sensitive to the speech of public employees. Part V then outlines the theoretical grounding for this article’s proposal: fiduciary political theory, which underlies the text and structure of all state constitutions. Building from that theoretical discussion, Part V continues by proposing and defending a novel approach to protecting both public employee speech rights and the governmental interests in providing services to the public. This approach builds from the text and underlying theory of state constitutions, while avoiding the somewhat arbitrary categorization that imperils federal doctrine. Finally, the article concludes in Part VI with some thoughts about what the analysis presented here might mean for other state constitutional rights with federal analogues
UGA Athens Campus to be Closed and on Modified Operations Friday, Jan. 10, 2025
No full textThe University of Georgia has been actively monitoring the development of a winter storm headed to our area. With the safety and security of our faculty, staff and students foremost in our minds, the University of Georgia Athens Campus will close and move to modified operations on Friday, January 10, 2025. All in-person classes, campus events and activities will be canceled throughout the day. Further updates will be sent as they become available. 1/11/25 4:31 PM Law Library Hours
The Law Library will operate on its regular schedule tomorrow (Sunday, 1/12). For more information, please visit https://www.law.uga.edu/library-hours-operation . 1/10/25 3:05 PM Law Library Hours
Due to the inclement weather, the Law Library will be open from 1:00 - 5:00 on Saturday. Please note that the hours may change depending on how the weather progresses, so watch for further updates or check the School of Law\u27s website before coming to campus.
We will provide updates on Sunday\u27s hours tomorrow. 1/9/25 2:36 PM School of Law updates to UGA Athens Campus Operations Friday, Jan. 10
As you are aware, the main campus of the University of Georgia will be closed on Friday, January 10, due to the threat of inclement weather.
This means School of Law buildings will be closed on Friday, January 10. We will look to reschedule any events and activities that were scheduled for these dates when operations return to normal. For those organizing or hosting events on these days, please reach out to any scheduled guests and registered attendees to ensure they are aware of UGA’s closure.
This includes the law library, which will temporarily suspend swipe card access at midnight tonight through Friday, January 10. We will monitor the situation and let you know if and when the library will reopen on Saturday, January 11.
Regarding classes: Consistent with the University\u27s guidance, each faculty instructor will determine whether to hold their class online at the scheduled time, post asynchronous lectures, or reschedule the classes. This is for several reasons including accreditor rules, institution-wide demands on IT staff and other staff who may be personally affected by weather-related matters.
Regarding clinics: The same closure applies, with one caveat as described. Under no circumstances should students be required to appear in person on campus (or anywhere else). Nor, as a general matter, should clinical faculty or staff come to campus or the clinic offices downtown. That said, we understand that clinical faculty or staff may have certain ethical duties to clients or courts that must be adhered to. If such matters can be rescheduled or conducted remotely, that should be the first course of action. If not, clinical faculty and staff may work in person unless conditions prevent safe travel.
Regarding registration and drop/add: The deadline has been extended to Tuesday, January 14, at 11:59 p.m.
Whom should I contact if I have questions? Students with class-specific questions should contact their professors. Students with more general questions should contact Dean Dennis or Ms. Tickles. Employees should contact their direct supervisors, most of whom are on the School of Law’s Crisis Response Group.
Most importantly, please be careful over the coming days. Make sure your devices are charged and stay in touch with your friends and family. We look forward to reopening soon, but for now, our focus is on ensuring the safety of our community.
The safety of our community is always our #1 priority, and the law school\u27s standing crisis response team remains in frequent communication regarding potential inclement weather events and the effects they may have on law school operations and on those in our community who are living in and/or traveling through the weather’s path.
In these situations, please remember: Your primary source for emergency news and information relating to the University of Georgia is emergency.uga.edu. As information emerges from emergency.uga.edu and other official UGA communications, the law school will update its own homepage and social media platforms based on that information. As necessary, the law school will send separate emails to students, staff and faculty regarding law-school-specific impacts of any university-wide decisions. We will also utilize ugaLAWalert for texting law-school-specific messaging (see below). School of Law faculty, staff and students are invited to sign up for a one-way texting notification system by following these instructions: Text “ugaLAWalert” to 877-804-2955. Please note that you must chose to opt in to this service, and you can opt out at any time. Please remember this texting feature does NOT take the place of our uga.edu email address that serves as the primary form of emergency notification. In summary, the law school generally follows UGA’s lead when it comes to inclement weather and other crises. Please rely on UGA sources first, knowing the law school will supplement those as needed
UGA finishes as semifinalists at the National Moot Court Competition
No full textCongratulations to third-year students Mona E. Abboud, Taylor L. Stablein and Casey E. Wofford for finishing as semifinalists at the National Moot Court Competition in New York City, finishing among the top four teams in the nation. The team also earned honors for having the second-best brief score out of 32 teams. Notably, Abboud, Stablein and Wofford went undefeated in their regional in Atlanta in November to qualify for the national tier of the tournament.
The National Moot Court Competition is co-sponsored by the American College of Trial Lawyers and the New York City Bar Association. More than 150 accredited law schools annually participate in this prestigious competition involving more than 1,000 students.
Pictured are (l. to r.) Taylor L. Stablein, Mona E. Abboud, Dean Usha R. Rodrigues and Casey E. Wofford
Effectiveness of Research Plans: A Case Study
Full text linkThis article presents a case study examining whether the creation and use of research plans enhance the effectiveness of legal research by law students. Despite their emphasized role in legal research pedagogy, research plans are often underutilized by students in their summer jobs, clinical work, and post-graduate employment. Through a three-part study, the authors surveyed upper-level students about their use and impressions of research plans, analyzed performance outcomes from a research simulation involving a legal hypothetical, and evaluated five years of assessment data from a 1L Legal Research course. While the experimental study did not yield statistically significant results, students who used research plans tended to spot more legal issues and achieved higher average scores. A logistic regression model analysis of 1L assessments demonstrated a strong correlation between higher research plan scores and stronger performance on substantive legal research tasks. In addition to quantitative data, student feedback received from a survey highlighted the organizational, strategic, and confidence-building benefits of research plans. Though not conclusive, the findings support the pedagogical emphasis on research planning and suggest that such plans can improve legal research outcomes. The article concludes by advocating for continued instruction and further empirical study of research plan usage and effectiveness
Amicus Briefs, 2025
Full text linkSpring 2025 New Law Library Personnel New Law Library Resources Informal Instruction Faculty Services & Instructional Support Law Dawgs
Summer 2025 Generative AI Updates Law Library Resources Law Library Awards & Honors Faculty Services & Instructional Support Law Dawgs
Fall 2025 Generative AI Updates Law Library Resources Faculty Services & Instructional Support Informal Instruction Law Dawg
A message from Dean Usha R. Rodrigues
No full textAs we begin a new year and a new semester, I am pleased to write to you as the 14th dean of the University of Georgia School of Law. Thank you for all the warm wishes and offers of support you have sent since the announcement of my appointment. My family and I have been deeply moved by the generous welcome I have received. When I first arrived in Athens in the fall of 2005, I never imagined that nearly 20 years later I would serve in this role. What attracted me to UGA all those years ago is precisely what has kept me here: the extraordinary sense of community that we all cherish. It is that shared sense of community that has inspired me to take on this important position.
Over the past few weeks, I have been pondering the second beat of our familiar tagline: “Prepare. Connect. Lead.” The idea of connection resonates especially deeply with me, perhaps because connection is so crucial to the theory and practice of law. When students’ eyes light up with understanding, they are making connections. Perhaps they are seeing the relationship between the different fields of law, how insights from contracts apply in property or federal courts. Perhaps they are connecting doctrine with the practice of law through the many experiential opportunities we offer.
As important as these kinds of connections are, human connections are just as vital. The strong relationships that we have – between and among students, faculty, staff, alumni and friends – are critical to who we are and what we do. So, with the refrain of connect top of mind, I will share a few thoughts about where we are and where we are headed.
I want to assure you that our law school is in a good place – a very good place – thanks to the hard work so many have invested in our community. We will build on this foundation of strength, remaining focused on our core mission: to be a great national public law school that matches excellence with access.
Advancing that mission means recruiting and retaining intellectually vibrant faculty who will engage in the important national, state and local issues of our day. These faculty will educate the next generation of legal leaders. As a Tier-1 research university, UGA affords an array of opportunities to pursue interdisciplinary research and federal grants with faculty colleagues across campus. There is room for growth in this area, including with the new School of Medicine, to attract legal scholars to Athens. We also want to deepen our connections with members of the judiciary – both by helping our students secure clerkships across the country and by bringing more jurists to campus.
We will continue to measure our success by student outcomes like bar passage, employment and student debt. We want our graduates to connect their passions with their professional dreams – whether it is big law or solo practice; public service or in-house; practice in Rome, GA, or in Rome, Italy. Bottom line – wherever our students want to go, our law school can get them there.
UGA Law has risen in important national rankings – including U.S. News & World Report (#20 overall/#7 among publics) and Best Value Law School (#1 for five of the last seven years). We are seeing increased interest among prospective students, potential employers and professors. This recognition is gratifying, of course, but it is meaningful only because it is an acknowledgment of the quality of our law school. This growing external awareness of our value helps us to better connect with and serve the needs of the citizens of our state, our nation and our globe.
Under the committed leadership of the deans who came before me, we have accomplished so much. It is our strong community and shared purpose that will propel us forward as we remain a culture that values inclusive excellence, where every individual feels they are valued, supported and an integral part of our collective success.
I want to emphasize that the true strength of our institution lies in our people – the faculty, staff, alumni, students and friends of our law school. This was especially evident during and following the tragic event last week in New Orleans. I was moved by the compassion and solidarity demonstrated by our students and alumni supporting one another during such an awful time, as it spoke volumes about the community that we all hold so dear.
Please know I am deeply honored to have been chosen as your dean, and I look forward to enhancing existing relationships and building new connections as we embark on this new journey together. I am counting on each of you to help advance the mission and vision of the University of Georgia School of Law. Together we can strengthen our institution and exemplify what a great national public law school can and should be.
Sincerely,
Usha R. RodriguesDean, University Professor & M.E. Kilpatrick Chair of Corporate Finance and Securities La