7482 research outputs found
Sort by
The Exclusionary Rule: Is It on Its Way Out? Should It Be?
No full textarticle published in law journalThis symposium, comprising six articles in addition to this one, was triggered by a spate of Supreme Court opinions occurring over the last seven years, all of which raise the two questions in the title to this article (which is also the title of the symposium). Since 1974, when United States v. Calandra definitively established deterrence as the primary objective of the suppression remedy, the Court has nibbled away at the exclusionary rule from a number of different directions. But the Court's decisions in Hudson v. Michigan (2006), Herring v. United States (2009), and Davis v. United States (2011) reveal a Court that is now willing to take much larger bites out of the rule, and perhaps even swallow it whole
Being Pragmatic About Forensic Linguistics
No full textarticle published in law journalThis article aims to provide some legal context to the Authorship Attribution
Workshop (“conference”). In particular, I want to offer some pragmatic observations on what courts will likely demand of forensic linguistics experts and tentatively suggest what the field should aspire to in both the short and long run
Rancière’s Political "Perceptible" and Perversions of Marxist Ideology: An Analysis of Narrative Politics in Brecht, Bulgakov, and Ishiguro
Get PDFEnglish Department Honors Thesis.English DepartmentCollege of Arts and Scienc
A National Marketing Study and Strategy for Wofford College
Get PDFLeadership Policy and Organizations Department Capstone ProjectDepartment of Leadership Policy and OrganizationsPeabody College of Education and Human Developmen
The Emotionally Intelligent Judge
Get PDFarticle published in law reviewJudges, like all of us, have been acculturated to an ideal of dispassion. But judges experience emotion on a regular basis. Judicial emotion must be managed competently. The psychology of emotion regulation can help judges learn to prepare realistically for, and respond thoughtfully to, the emotions they are bound to feel. This short piece, written for a judicial audience, synthesizes research that can help judges accept, analyze, and shape the emotional aspects of their work
The Influence of Student Affairs on First-year Students' Intent to Re-enroll at the University of Memphis
Get PDFLeadership Policy and Organizations Department Capstone ProjectDepartment of Leadership Policy and OrganizationsPeabody College of Education and Human Developmen
Reflections on the University of Washington's Asian Law Center
No full textarticle published in law journalIn June 2012, Professor Haley was awarded the Order of the Rising Sun (3rd Class) from the Emperor of Japan for his contribution to the discipline of Japanese law and education to Japanese legal professionals and academics. In honor of this achievement, the University of Washington School of Law and Asian Law Center brought together distinguished scholars and Asian Law Center alumni to discuss the judiciary's increased role in Japan and Asia in two conferences. What follows is Professor Haley's address at the University of Washington School of Law, on October 19, 2012. In this speech, Professor Haley provides a history of the Asian Law Center (originally, the Asian Law Program)
Rehnquist and Panvasive Searches
No full textarticle published in law journalIn the history of the Supreme Court, William Rehnquist may have been the least friendly justice toward the view that the Fourth Amendment should be read expansively. Even he, however, might have interpreted the amendment to place more restrictions on modern law enforcement techniques than current caselaw does. Relying on a 1974 article authored by Rehnquist, this essay, written for a symposium on Rehnquist and the Fourth Amendment, describes his views on the types of requirements the Fourth Amendment imposes on the police, how decriminalization can protect privacy, and most importantly, why Rehnquist might have been willing to regulate surveillance that is “panvasive” — pervasive and widespread — even if it focuses on public activities or information surrendered to third parties
Should New Zealand Adopt Say on Pay?
No full textarticle published in law journalAround the globe, the latest fashion in corporate governance circles is "Say on Pay," a shareholder vote – sometimes precatory, other times mandatory – on CEO remuneration. Country after country has adopted Say on Pay in response to shareholder disgust over the size of CEO pay packets. Beginning with the U.K., and later followed by the Netherlands, Australia, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, France, Switzerland, and the U.S., there has been a widespread acceptance of the shareholder vote on executive pay around the world. In this article, we ask the question: Should New Zealand follow the crowd and adopt Say on Pay, or should it continue down its own path, leaving directors with near total control over executive remuneration levels?
Academics are divided over the desirability of Say on Pay – those that believe in strong managerial power are firmly against it, while shareholder activists come out heavily in its favor. The main theoretical arguments revolve around whether: it will tip the balance of power against managers; shareholders are competent to evaluate executive remuneration; third party voting advisors will gain too much power if it is enacted; there will be any reduction in the size, and rate of growth, of CEO pay packets; and it will strengthen the relationship between pay and performance.
The experience in the U.K. and the U.S. to date sheds some light on the validity of these arguments. On average, shareholders have voted strongly in favor of executive pay practices at most companies. Say on Pay seems to have had little impact on the size and growth of average CEO pay, but it does appear to have impacted pay practices at poorly performing companies that have unusually high pay. There is a greater level of engagement between shareholders and managers on pay issues at many companies, and firms have become more responsive to negative shareholder Say on Pay votes. Third party voting advisors, such as Institutional Shareholder Services, have become important corporate governance players, whose recommendations have a significant impact on shareholder voting outcomes.
In light of these academic arguments, and practical experience in the U.K. and U.S., we believe that New Zealand should carefully consider whether to adopt Say on Pay. We do not view the evidence as compelling the conclusion that Say on Pay is essential, but we can understand why some shareholders might want to see it implemented. However, the existing evidence shows that it is unlikely to have a big effect on current pay practices at most companies in New Zealand if it is adopted
