St. Mary's University, Texas
St. Mary's University, San Antonio: St. Mary's Law Digital RepositoryNot a member yet
1503 research outputs found
Sort by
10-0927 RIO GRANDE REGIONAL HOSP., INC. v. VILLARREAL
No full text10-0927 This advisory serves only as an abbreviated guide to oral argument. Summaries are prepared by the Court's staff attorney for public information and reflect his judgment alone on facts and legal issues and in no way represent the Court's opinion a
Permanent Judicial Commission for Children, Youth and Families
No full textSupreme Court of Texas Permanent Judicial Commission for Children, Youth and Families 201 West 14th Street Supreme Court Courtroom Austin, Texas Meeting Agenda 10:00 Commencement / Opening Remarks – The Honorable Eva Guzman Commission Membership Changes
Moot Points Notes from the Sarita Kenedy East Law Library Issue 16 February and March 2012
No full textDirector's Message: Newly furnished library, Special Congratulations!, New and Notable Book Review, Library Renewals & Fines Policy, Recent Faculty Publications, Our Library By the Numbers, The Library Re-Carpeting Project is Complete!, Sarita Kenedy Ea
10-0950 ENBRIDGE PIPELINE (EAST TEXAS) L.P. v. AVINGER TIMBER, LLC
No full text10-0950 Enbridge Pipelines (East Texas) L.P. v. Avinger Timber, LLC from Marion County and the Sixth District Court of Appeals, Texarkana For petitioner: Stephen G. Tipps, Houston For respondent: Glenn Sodd, Corsicana The principal issues in this condemn
The Supremacy Clause Preemption Rationale Reasonably Restrains an Individual State Pursuing Its Own Separate but Unequal Immigration Policy
No full textI am a supporter of federal immigration reform, but until progressive federal immigration reform is implemented, having one dysfunctional federal immigration system is a lesser evil than having fifty or more dysfunctional immigration policies driving America. Part II of this Article discusses the historical and continuing tension between a state’s desire to control the rights of immigrants as a local issue and the Constitution’s grant of power to Congress to regulate immigration as a national foreign policy issue. Part III discusses why immigration is inherently linked to foreign policy and why the preemption rationale applies to state and local regulations that substantially interfere with the life of any immigrant present in a community because of the potential impact on America’s global interest. Part IV presents an analysis of the preemption issue where state laws or policies relating to immigrants are in conformity with the Supremacy Clause. The Article concludes by explaining that lack of congressional intent on the issue of regulating immigration does not by default create a state right to regulate immigration because immigration is by its very nature foreign policy
Offense, Defense, or Just a Big Fence? Why Border Security is a Valid National Security Issue
No full textThis Update examines why a comprehensive approach to solve the myriad of border issues is necessary to fortify our national security efforts. First, the key to understanding border security challenges faced by the United States in 2012 requires an analysis of the current Mexican drug cartels’ operations. The cartels’ activities not only impact Mexico, but they also directly lead to the second area of analysis: an increase in violence near the border that may be crossing over onto U.S. soil. Second, the Update addresses competition to import drugs into the United States as further mixed with cartel operations and violence. Trafficking of drugs, human trafficking, and the influx of thousands of people illegally crossing the border every year is the third issue discussed herein. While the main purpose of this Update is to highlight why the federal government must address overall border security issues and their implicit national security overtones, it concludes with a brief discussion of proposals that could make a difference on the border
Moot Points Notes from the Sarita Kenedy East Law Library Issue 18 August and September 2012
No full textDirector's Message; 1L Guidebooks Available at the Law Library; Meet Wilhelmina Randtke New Electronic Services Librarian; Recent Faculty Publications; Neighborhood Dining; Where to Eat on Campu
The Irony of AT&T v. Concepcion
No full textIrony is defined as “the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning.” Though many other definitions of the word exist, in light of the Supreme Court’s majority opinion in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, this definition comes to mind. Read broadly, the decision strikes a blow to the ability of consumers to bring suits against companies, both inside and outside of arbitration. But that was not the intent behind the federal act that the Court relied upon to justify its decision
A Theoretical Case for Standardized Vesting Documents
No full textAs it stands now, no one familiar with real estate law or commerce would expect different parties in different jurisdictions to record identical, or even similar, instruments. In an immediate sense, this heterogeneity of the recorded documents (“vesting heterogeneity”) does not seem a good thing: parties utilizing the recording system generally seek to make known, or to discern, the same generic type of information?that is, evidence of claims upon property?so why are different forms and types of documents utilized all over the country? This Article analyzes this vesting heterogeneity from a new perspective and concludes that it is, in fact, cause for significant concern. Vesting heterogeneity has arisen organically, growing with the recording system as they both evolved over time. This historical explanation does not, however, excuse the cost associated with such a lack of uniformity. Anyone seeking information with respect to any piece of property must navigate the complexities and uncertainties that arise because all such information is heterogeneous and, as a consequence, difficult to understand and utilize. This represents both an immediate transactional cost and an increased risk of ill-informed behavior. This is particularly troublesome because this sort of cost-based concern arising from variability has a well-established analogue in property law that the law clearly desires to avoid. That analogue is the cost that would arise if property law were to permit unlimited property forms and gives rise to what is known as the numerus clausus theory. This theory explains the law’s hostility toward new, or different, types of property and holds that such heterogeneity is not generally permitted because of the extremely high informational costs associated with such creativity. This Article suggests that this common law concept can, and should, inform our analysis of vesting heterogeneity and that it precipitates strongly against such lack of uniformity. This is because the costs that drive the numerus clausus to hold that variability should be limited are strikingly similar to those created by variability of vesting documents. As such, this theory is relevant here such that the same analysis should be applied to vesting heterogeneity by asking whether a different (or “new”) document is helpful enough to outweigh the informational costs inherent therein. Based on this reasoning, this Article concludes that the law is wrong to systematically ignore heterogeneity in vesting documents. Instead, a numerus clausus type of analysis should be applied to new or different vesting documents to determine whether any inherent lack of uniformity is defensible. Where it is not, uniformity should be imposed