43674 research outputs found
Sort by
Troy Michael Kell, Petitioner/Appellant, v. LARRY BENZON, Warden of the Utah State Prison, Respondent/Appellee. : Brief of Appellant
Get PDFAPPELLANT\u27S BRIEF
PUBLIC
Death Penalty Case
Appeal from the Sixth Judicial District Court,In and For Sanpete County, Honorable Wallace Le
SALT LAKE COUNTY, DUCHESNE COUNTY, UINTAH COUNTY, WASHINGTON COUNTY, and WEBER COUNTY, all political subdivisions of the State of Utah, Plaintiffs/Appellants, vs. STATE OF UTAH, DELTA AIR LINES, INC., AND SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC., Defendants/Appellees. : Reply Brief
Get PDFREPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OFAPPELLEES DELTA AIR LINES,INC. AND SKYWEST AIRLINES,INC.\u27S SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF
ON APPEAL FROM THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT,SALT LAKE COUNTY, HONORABLE KARA PETTIT, DISTRICT JUDG
Johannah Bright, Lisa Tapp, and Pia Merlo-Schmucker, Appellees/Respondents, v. Sherman Sorensen, M.D.; Sorensen Cardiovascular Group; St. Mark\u27s Hospital; and IHC Health Services, Inc., Appellants/Petitioners. : Reply Brief
Get PDFREPLY BRIEF OF APPELLANTSSHERMAN SORENSEN, M.D. ANDSORENSEN CARDIOVASCULARGROUP
On Consolidated Interlocutory Appeal from the Third District, Salt LakeCount
JODY MATTENA AND MAY HARRIS, Appellants, v. SHELLIE BIESELE AND MELODIE JACOBSEN, Appellees. : Brief of Appellant
Get PDFBRIEF OF APPELLANT JODY MATTENA
On appeal from the Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County,Honorable Matthew Evans, Honorable Patrick CorumDistrict Court No 14090279
Patent Nationalism and the Case for a New U.S. Patent Working Requirement
Get PDFA working requirement is a provision of intellectual property law that uses the threat of punishment to encourage holders to “work” their intellectual property. This Article examines the case for adding a working requirement to U.S. patent law. It explains that, given the current global trends in economic and technological development, a working requirement that increases the exposure of Americans to new technologies through the manufacture of inventions is necessary for the U.S. patent system to fulfill its constitutional purpose, specifically, “[t]o promote the Progress of Science and Useful Arts.” To that end, this Article analyzes elements of working requirements in foreign patent laws to identify specific features that should be incorporated within a new U.S. working requirement. It also addresses how to structure the working requirement to prevent potential abuse and presents a law and economics analysis as to how the requirement can be used to encourage manufacturing in the United States
Working Without a Net: Supreme Court Decision-Making as Performance
Get PDFThough judges often portray themselves as helpless to alter case outcomes dictated by law, this is mostly false humility. Judges are illusionists, and their opinions sleights of hand which obscure that they participate in creating what they purport merely to apply. This is especially the case in the Supreme Court, from which there is no appeal. The Justices perform the law, and their opinions are the records of these performances.Performance theory supplies a better means of analyzing Supreme Court decisions than ubiquitous and wearisome attacks on judicial integrity. The Court has its precedents, but they have no connection to a pre-existing natural order, and often not even to a determinate text. The Court’s readings of its precedents form a tradition that is rarely so fixed as to yield only one possible result in every case. This makes the Court’s constitutional decision-making the purest of performances—holdings and citations are “iterated,” shorn from their original contexts and dropped into new ones, creating new and surprising principles that masquerade as old and established. It is unhelpful to call this dishonest. The Justices cannot admit their performative role because it cannot be reconciled with still-powerful higher-law and rule-of-law myths. The necessity of performing constitutional law stems from the general absence of a single authoritative text that can constrain that performance; there are, instead, multiple interpretive possibilities, which makes performance inevitable. The Justices are always working without a net, performing constitutional law in opinions with nothing beneath them
Leveraging Pharma to Lower Premiums: Medical Loss Ratio Regulation in the Pharmaceutical Industry
Get PDFMany recognize escalating drug prices as a significant dilemma related to America’s rising healthcare costs. Yet few can agree on what to do about them. Unaffordable drug prices are a result of many complex forces. One theory to address this problem is to reduce all government intervention and let normal market forces act as they usually do to bring the goods’ prices down to consumer-friendly ranges. However, the prescription drug market is not, and perhaps never can be, a normal market. Reasons for this include (1) a lack of price transparency, (2) information and control asymmetries between patients and physicians, (3) third-party payors, (4) demand that remains constant irrespective of any exorbitant price increases (i.e., market inelasticity), and (5) patent-ensured monopolies. These factors disrupt the normal market forces that usually maintain prices at levels amenable to the general public (i.e., price equilibrium). Left unchecked, Big Pharma increase their prices partly to pay for elevated marketing and other expenses and partly to recoup greater earnings. Consequently, they rake in substantial profits—at an average greater than any other industry. Thus, rising drug prices burden not only those who need them but also those who are expected to help pay for them. To right this abnormal market, this Note suggests an alternative theory: that Congress should apply a medical loss ratio framework to the pharmaceutical drug industry, similar to the ratio framework applied to reform the health insurance industry. This framework seeks to balance corporate profits with consumer benefits by separating profits and “other” less value-adding expenses from those that add greater value to the consumer (i.e., “medical loss”). In the health insurance industry’s 80:20 ratio framework, if the less value-adding expenses (e.g., profits, sales and marketing) cross the ratio threshold (20%), then the companies must reimburse the excess back to the consumer. This measure has eased some insurance premium increases. Similar reform is needed in the pharmaceutical industry, as currently the industry averages 21% profit— significantly above that of other industries—while also spending around 23% on sales and marketing and around 30% on manufacturing.Therefore, the average medical loss ratio is roughly 30:70 (30% on medical loss and 70% on less value-adding areas). Imposing a stricter ratio threshold, such as 40:60, would provide some much-needed incentives for drug companies to reduce their lesser-value-adding expenses and, as a result, reduce drug prices. If Big Pharma failed to meet the 40% threshold, then the excess would be returned to the consumer. Imposing a medical loss ratio regulation in the pharmaceutical industry is a promising solution to one of our nation’s greatest healthcare cost concerns