585,942 research outputs found
David L. McCarty Civil War letter
No full textThis collection contains a letter written by David L. McCarty from a camp near Helena, Ark., to his friend Ellen, on March 18, 1863
Correspondence of David Lawrence McKay, April 1924 to June 1924
No full textCopies of letters sent to David Lawrence McKay during the period from April to June of 1924, while he was serving in the Swiss and German Mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Some of the letters are in French. Also includes a letter from David L. McKay to Professor James L. Barker at the University of Utah
Personal Papers (MS 80-0002)
No full textLetter from Harris L. Kempner to David L. Cole returning a check he forgot to sign the first time
Correspondence of David Lawrence McKay, September to December 1934
No full textScans of letters sent to David Lawrence McKay during the period from September to December 1934. Most of the letters are from his mother, Emma Ray McKay and some are also addressed to Mildred, D. L. McKay\u27s wife. One letter is from George Sutherland, and one is from Emma Rae to Midene, David and Mildred\u27s daughter
MDL as Public Administration
No full textFrom the Deepwater Horizon disaster to the opioid crisis, multidistrict litigation—or simply MDL—has become the preeminent forum for devising solutions to the most difficult problems in the federal courts. MDL works by refusing to follow a regular procedural playbook. Its solutions are case specific, evolving, and ad hoc. This very flexibility, however, provokes charges that MDL violates basic requirements of the rule of law.
At the heart of these charges is the assumption that MDL is simply a larger version of the litigation that takes place every day in federal district courts. But MDL is not just different in scale than ordinary litigation; it is different in kind. In structure and operation, MDL parallels programs like Social Security in which an administrative agency continuously develops new procedures to handle a high volume of changing claims. Accordingly, MDL is appropriately judged against the “administrative” rule of law that emerged in the decades after World War II and underpins the legitimacy of the modern administrative state.
When one views MDL as an administrative program instead of a larger version of ordinary civil litigation, the real threats to its legitimacy come into focus. The problem is not that MDL is ad hoc. Rather, it is that MDL lacks the guarantees of transparency, public participation, and ex post review that administrative agencies have operated under since the middle of the twentieth century. The history of the administrative state suggests that MDL’s continued success as a forum for resolving staggeringly complex problems depends on how it addresses these governance deficits
David L. Rosenhan (1929–2012)
No full textPresents an obituary for David L. Rosenhan (1929–2012). A distinguished psychologist and professor emeritus at Stanford University, Rosenhan died February 6, 2012, at the age of 82, after a long illness. Born in Jersey City, New Jersey, on November 22, 1929, he received a bachelor’s degree in mathematics (1951) from Yeshiva College and a master’s degree in economics (1953) and a doctorate in psychology (1958) from Columbia University. A professor of law and of psychology at Stanford University from 1971 until his retirement in 1998, Rosenhan was a pioneer in applying psychological methods to the practice of law, including the examination of expert witnesses, jury selection, and jury deliberation. A former president of the American Psychology–Law Society and of the American Board of Forensic Psychology, Rosenhan was a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, of the American Psychological Association, and of the American Psychological Society. Before joining the Stanford Law School faculty, he was a member of the faculties of Swarthmore College, Princeton University, Haverford College, and the University of Pennsylvania. He also served as a research psychologist at the Educational Testing Service. As generations of Stanford students can attest, David Rosenhan was a spellbinding lecturer who managed to convey the sense that he was speaking to each individual, no matter how large the group. To his graduate students, he was consistently encouraging and optimistic, always ready to share a joke or story, and gently encouraging of their creativity and progressive independence as researchers. The lessons he cared most about offering, in the classroom as in his research, were about human dignity and the need to confront abuse of power and human frailties
David L. Haun Collection
No full textPhotograph of a stockade at Fort Gibson, OK. Photo by David L. Haun
David L. Haun Collection
No full textPhotograph of a stockade at Fort Gibson, OK. Photo by David L. Haun
David L. Haun Collection
No full textPhotograph of a stockade at Fort Gibson, OK. Photo by David L. Haun
David L. Haun Collection
No full textPhotograph of chimney ruins at Fort Gibson, OK. Photo by David L. Haun
- …
