Digital Commons @ UDC Law (University of the District of Columbia Law Library)
Not a member yet
840 research outputs found
Sort by
A Lawyer for Every Child: Client-Directed Representation in Dependency Cases
No full textThe article begins with a due process analysis concluding that children are legally entitled to counsel and continues by presenting examples of federal and state legislation, court decisions, and public policy arguments that support this right. The article then goes a step further to advocate for a traditional, client-directed model of representation, which empowers children and leads to better judicial decision making. Finally, the article discusses the impact of high caseloads and lack of training on attorney performance. This article serves as an important addition to the academic literature examining the need for and role of the child\u27s attorney in dependency proceedings
Measure for Measure: The Uneasy Marriage of Tax Policy and Immigration Reform
No full textThe United States has deeply contradictory policies related to undocumented immigrant workers. America’s disparate immigration and tax policies include immigration directives that designate deportation proceedings for any immigrant living in the U.S. without proper authorization. Simultaneously, the government’s enforcement of its tax laws requires undocumented workers to apply for a tax identification number in order to file taxes because, as undocumented immigrants, they do not qualify for a valid Social Security Number. Additionally, undocumented workers do not qualify for Social Security benefits, but they are subject to mandatory Social Security and Medicare payroll tax withholdings on their W-2 wages. This results in a schizophrenic existence for undocumented immigrants living in the United States.1 Undocumented immigrants financially contribute to their communities by way of income, employment and sales taxes.2 However, in their undocumented state, they possess no political power while the United States simultaneously enforces incongruent tax and immigration laws.3 The result is a fractured and tenuous marriage of opposing ideals.4 These ideals, manifest as tax and immigration policy, will be explored herei
The Legal Framework for States as Employers-of-Choice in Workplace Flexibility: A Case Study of Arizona and Michigan
No full textThe Legal Framework for States as Employers-of-Choice in Workplace Flexibility: A Case Study of Arizona and Michigan examines the legal frameworks Arizona and Michigan utilize for flexible work arrangements, time off, and career flexibility in their state workforce. Specifically, it provides an overview of the statutes, regulations, executive actions, and collective bargaining agreements that authorize workplace flexibility in the state workforce. After laying out this framework for both states, this paper makes several key observations: • Flexibility provides multiple benefits to states as employers, to state employees, and to the community at large. The business case for workplace flexibility is clear—flexibility helps states as employers with the recruitment and retention of top talent, addresses an aging workforce, reduces absenteeism and real estate costs, and improves disaster and emergency preparedness, among other things. Flexibility also allows employees to better balance work and personal responsibilities, and improves morale, health and wellness. For the community, providing flexibility decreases wait time for state responses and improves customer service. Flexibility also allows more employees to volunteer in the community, improves the environment and offers a range of other societal benefits. • Flexibility helps the government respond to problems as they arise. Arizona and Michigan have created and used new workplace flexibility to address emerging problems like rising gas prices and traffic congestion. In addition, the current economy provides states with opportunities to maintain—and even increase—flexibility through the creation and use of low or no cost innovative strategies for flexibility, which allow states to “do more with less.” Using preexisting authority, Arizona and Michigan have also encouraged the use of flexibility to combat the H1N1 pandemic and address other public health concerns. • Successful model flexibility programs exist and can be replicated by others. Existing programs are useful models for other state agencies and employers to learn from. As other states and employers look for solutions to assist with these and other emerging problems—be it working to improve operations in a difficult economy, responding to an emerging public health concern, or addressing a multi-generational workforce—considering the experiences of Arizona and Michigan with model programs is a useful way to help other state departments, other states, and other employers become employers-of-choice. • Leadership is a critical component of successful flexibility options. Strong leadership and support from governors, agency heads, managers, unions and others is a critical component to full implementation of workplace flexibility. Governors need to promote these policies, oversee their implementation, and continued success and applicability. Managers, in turn, need to educate and train colleagues on the available workplace flexibility. Through such leadership at all levels, state workforces can more effectively implement workplace flexibility and reap all of the benefits it offers. Assessing, evaluating, and understanding the flexibility frameworks used by Arizona and Michigan as well as the elements that make these states employers-of-choice bolsters support for all states to further develop workplace flexibility options that work for their work. In turn, these workplace flexibility options support the dynamic multi-generational state workforce, resulting in a more productive and diverse workforce that helps states be employers-of-choice
Attorney Referral, Negligence, and Vicarious Liability
No full textAs a consequence of requests from clients or prospective clients, lawyers are often placed in a position of giving referrals, especially in situations of cross-specialty referrals (such as an estate planning attorney whose longtime client has become a party in a personal injury lawsuit) or cross-jurisdictional referrals (such as an attorney in Michigan who is contacted by a prospective client who must respond to a lawsuit that was filed in Ohio).
But if the lawyer who receives the referral commits malpractice in handling the case, can the lawyer who made the referral be held liable for the client\u27s loss? This paper argues that plaintiffs can draw analogies to doctrines of undue influence and breach of fiduciary duty, while defendants can invoke an analogy to the business judgment rule
Time Off for Military Families: An Emerging Case Study in a Time of War...And the Tipping Point for Future Laws Supporting Work-Life Balance?
No full textReturning To New Orleans: Reflections On The Post-Katrina Recovery, Disaster Relief, And The Struggle For Social Justice
No full text
