LARC Cardoso Law (Yeshida Univ)
Not a member yet
9951 research outputs found
Sort by
Cardozo Law News Brief: May 10, 2024
Get PDFFeatured Faculty: Samuel Weinstein Saurabh Vishnubhakat Alexander Reinert Jessica Roth Edward Zelinsky Kate Levine Michel Rosenfeld Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum Young Ran (Christine) Kim Jacob Noti-Victor Gabor Rona Edward Zelinsk
Discrimination In Incarceration: Incarcerated People Litigate to Witness the Solar Eclipse In New York
Get PDFThe rights of incarcerated people have been historically overlooked and ignored in the United States, and this must change. It is critical for incarcerated people to be able to access and protect their rights because they are often exploited for free labor and receive little resources with which they can maintain their rights, which is part of what led the United Nations to issue a report finding that the United States has the “worst version of a racist criminal legal system.” Lawsuits and lobbying are two major means of expanding and protecting the rights of incarcerated people. In New York, incarcerated people recently had to file a lawsuit to fight for their right to simply witness a celestial event. Specifically, six incarcerated people sued for the right to witness the April 8, 2024 solar eclipse when they were informed they would not be allowed to. They argued that the solar eclipse holds religious significance to them and they believe witnessing such a rare celestial event could bring forth an incredibly important reflective period within themselves. For example, one of the plaintiffs pointed out that Christian congregations normally gather to observe together and celebrate “the handiwork of God” during solar eclipses. Fortunately, they reached a settlement before the eclipse occurred and were allowed to view it.
This post was originally published on the Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights and Social Justice website on April 19, 2024. The original post can be accessed via the Archived Link button above
Constitutional Constraint: The United States Should Follow in New Zealand’s Gun Reform Footsteps
Get PDFThe Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” The United States is one of three countries worldwide that provide a constitutional right to bear arms, but the only country where this right is not accompanied by a restrictive condition. Despite the apparent gun crisis that increasingly characterizes the United States, legislators struggle to implement regulation due to the Supreme Court’s classification of the Second Amendment as a right to self-defense. However, where the initial purpose of the Second Amendment was to equip civilians as members of the militia to ensure the security of the newly independent United States, it has, in turn, evolved into a loophole for domestic terrorism. Thus, the death count resulting from lack of adequate gun regulation now surpasses the casualties and represents the civil anarchy the United States was initially attempting to prevent.
This post was originally published on the Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review on January 8, 2024. The original post can be accessed via the Archived Link button above
Collusive Foreclosure Sales: The Forgotten Legacy of \u3ci\u3eNorthern Pacific v. Boyd\u3c/i\u3e
Get PDFIn BFP v. Resolution Trust Corp. (1994), the Supreme Court ruled that mortgage foreclosures could not be fraudulent conveyances – unless the foreclosure was “collusive.” It gave no clue what made mortgage foreclosures collusive. But in 1913, the Supreme Court defined collusive mortgage foreclosures in a famous railroad receivership case – Northern Pacific R. Co. v. Boyd. Boyd is usually thought to be the origin of the absolute priority rule in bankruptcy reorganization. Actually, it was a mortgage foreclosure sale. What made the sale collusive is that some of the shareholders of the defaulting railroad were also the shareholders of the new corporation formed to buy the assets of the defaulting railroad. The case is usually thought to be a fraudulent conveyance case. (Justice Willam O. Douglas thought so.) But it’s not. It is a case of piercing the corporate veil between the defaulting railroad and the buying railroad. Piercing the veil is inconsistent with a fraudulent conveyance theory. Furthermore, the court in Boyd did not need to pierce the veil. The plaintiff in the case (Boyd) was a secured creditor with an equitable lien on the sold assets, and the buying railroad (along with its purchase money secured lender) were bad faith purchasers subject to the lien. This was so even though the mortgage foreclosure was no fraudulent conveyance. It seems to be the case that bankruptcy’s absolute priority rule was borne in a manger lined with judicial error. Boyd lives on in state law under the name of “mere continuation” of a corporate entity
Cardozo Law News Brief: August 30, 2024
Get PDFFeatured Faculty: Jessica Roth Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum Young Ran (Christine) Kim Gabor Rona Anthony Sebo
The Illusion of Investigatory Questioning: Why New York Must Toss \u27Huffman’s\u27 Unconstitutional Interrogation Standard
No full textThe 1976 case ‘People v. Huffman’ distinguishes between “investigatory” and “interrogatory” questioning by the police. In this essay, the authors examine Huffman and show why the Court of Appeals should overrule it
Digital Barter Taxes Are Good Tax Policy
Get PDFThis short essay, aimed at state legislators, argues that digital barter taxes are good tax policy
Legal Research and the Declining Usefulness of Google Search
Get PDFA new year-long study on internet search engine results has rocked the librarian and information worlds: yes, Google really is getting worse
Practice Makes Perfect – or at Least Better!
Get PDFThis fall, I will teach my third semester of Advanced Legal Research at Cardozo School of Law. With the support of the library, I have learned a great deal about how to teach effectively over the past year. They gave me the opportunity to conduct a mock ALR class this summer, which helped me tremendously. In this post, I will describe my journey as a new adjunct professor
2023-2024 Annual Report
Get PDFThe 2023–2024 Annual Report for the Scholarly Services team at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law highlights the team’s major accomplishments in advancing the visibility and impact of the law school’s scholarly work. The report details the ongoing management of the LARC repository, which experienced a notable increase in usage and engagement over the past year. It also showcases the launch of new digital series and the processing of the Benjamin N. Cardozo Papers. Through their work, the team continues to support the preservation of the school’s intellectual legacy, promote research visibility, and contribute to academic excellence—serving as a valuable resource for faculty, students, and alumni.https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/larc-annual-report/1001/thumbnail.jp