Category Archives: BLS Faculty

Library Hours During Winter Recess

The Library hours for the coming weeks are as follows

  • Friday, Dec. 19th      –    8 am – 10 pmholidays
  • Saturday Dec. 20th  –    9 am –  5 pm
  • Sunday Dec. 21st     –  10 am –  5 pm
  • Monday Dec. 22nd  –    9 am –  5 pm
  • Tuesday Dec. 23rd  –    9 am –  5 pm

Wednesday Dec. 24th – Friday January 2nd – CLOSED

  • Monday – Thursday, Jan. 5 – 8:          9 am – 12 am
  • Friday & Saturday, Jan. 9 & 10:          9 am – 10 pm
  • Sunday, Jan. 11th                               10 am – 10pm
  • Monday – Thursday, Jan.12 – 15:       9 am – 12 am
  • Friday & Saturday, Jan.16 & 17:          9 am – 10 pm
  • Sunday, Jan.18th                                 10 am – 10 pm
  • Monday, Jan.19th (MLK Jr. Day)           9 am – 10 pm

     

    Tuesday, Jan. 20th Spring Semester Begins   Normal Library Hours Resume

newyear2015The BLS Library staff wish you all a Happy Holiday.  See you all next year!

 

 

Episode 092: Interview with Prof. Susan Herman

Episode 092: Interview with Prof. Susan Herman.mp3

A New York Law Journal article Law Students Speak Out Against Grand Jury Decisions reports that law students and faculty across the state are speaking out against the recent grand jury decisions not to indict white police officers involved in the deaths of unarmed black men in New York and Missouri. The events come in the wake of last week’s announcement that New York City police officer Daniel Pantaleo would not face charges in the chokehold death of Eric Garner on Staten Island which followed last month’s decision by a St. Louis County grand jury not to indict Ferguson, Missouri, police officer Darren Wilson in the August killing of teenager Michael Brown.

Students from New York University School of Law, New York Law School, Columbia Law School, Fordham University School of Law, City University of New York School of Law and Brooklyn Law School have taken to the streets in between studying for finals, which began this week. Last week, Columbia Law demanded postponements of final exams for any student experiencing trauma over the grand jury decisions and recent national conversations on race. Today, in the court yard in front of the school, about two dozen BLS law students who are in the midst of final exam staged a four and half minute die-in. BLS Law Professors Susan Herman and Beryl Jones-Woodin are hosting a number of faculty members in a Town Hall (“After Ferguson? After Garner? After __?”) at 12:45 on Wednesday, January 28, after classes resume, to discuss the legal and policy issues presented by the recent events in Ferguson, Staten Island, and many other locations. Professor Herman speaks about the upcoming event in the podcast at the link at the top of this post.

Grand JuryThe BLS Library has a number of titles in its collection on the subject of grand juries including Grand Jury 2.0: Modern Perspectives on the Grand Jury by Roger A. Fairfax (Call # KF9642 .G73 2011). The book brings together essays written by leading legal scholars and jurists to re-examine the role of the American grand jury, one of the oldest protections known to the American constitutional order and challenges the American legal culture to re-imagine the grand jury and proposes ways to adapt the grand jury’s proud heritage to the needs and realities of modern criminal justice. The book’s synthesis of criminal law and procedure theory and analysis along with concrete policy proposals makes it required reading for any scholar, student, jurist or lawyer interested in the past, present, or future of the American grand jury.

Problems with CALI

caliThe Center for Computer-Assisted Legal Instruction (CALI) has informed BLS Library that they have been having issues with the stability of instances in the CALI web cluster that have taken www.cali.org offline for extended periods over the last few days.
If you try the CALI website and it is down or slow please wait an hour or so and try again.
They hope to have this problem rectified soon and are sorry for the inconvenience.

Supreme Court Website Gets A Makeover

scotus

This past Monday, the Supreme Court Website displayed a new and improved look.

According to their press release, the reorganized menu and new, horizontal format make navigating the site easier and more efficient. Some of the most frequently requested information will now be available directly on the site’s homepage, including the transcripts and audio for the most recent oral arguments, and information for planning a visit to the Court. Website users will notice enhanced images and graphics, improved search features and updated access on mobile devices.

The Supreme Court Website, , was launched on April 17, 2000, to make Court information available via the Internet to the Bar, the public, and the news media.

Reiss on Government Sponsored Enterprises

Brooklyn Law School Professor of Law David Reiss recently posted The GSE Guarantee Fee as a Policy Tool on SSRN. The abstract reads:

Setting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s guarantee fee rates can have a large impact on the housing market. Setting the rate too low can negatively impact the financial health of Fannie and Freddie. It can also have a positive impact on housing prices because it reduces the overall cost of credit. On the other hand, setting the rate too high can generate excess revenues for the two companies. This would impact Congress’ plans for them as well as possible outcomes for the investor lawsuits arising from the GSE’s conservatorships. And it would also have dampening effect on housing prices, as it would increase the cost of mortgages. While the Federal Housing Finance Agency should consider the broad policy impacts when determining the guarantee fee rate, its main goal should be to set the rate at a level that properly accounts for the guarantee risk borne by the two companies.

Effron on Future of Forum Non Conveniens

Brooklyn Law School Professor of Law Robin Effron has posted on SSRN Atlantic Marine and the Future of Forum Non Conveniens. In December of 2013, the US Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision upholding a general contractor’s ability to require its subcontractors to litigate disputes in the state or federal court of its choosing. The article is schedule for publication later this year in the Hastings Law Journal. Here is the abstract:

This essay explores the impact of the Supreme Court’s unanimous opinion in Atlantic Marine Construction Co., Inc. v. U.S. District Court on forum non conveniens doctrine. Although Atlantic Marine concerned a § 1404(a) transfer within the federal system, and therefore does not directly address forum selection clauses pointing to foreign forums, the case will undoubtedly have an impact on how courts treat forum selection clauses that point to a foreign forum. In this essay, I will argue that the Atlantic Marine opinion relies on a strict coupling of § 1404(a) and forum non conveniens for its holding. As a result, lower courts will be more likely to conflate these two doctrines that had been slowly but surely developing on parallel tracks. This essay explains why merging or conflating § 1404(a) and forum non conveniens doctrine is problematic, both as a general matter and as applied to the specific context of forum selection clauses. It also demonstrates that the Court’s blunder is symptomatic of problems inherent in the current § 1404(a) and forum non conveniens standards, as well as doctrinal difficulties in federal enforcement of forum selection clauses.

Constitution Day

Wednesday, September 17 is Constitution Day and Citizenship Day according to 36 U.S.C. 106 which states its purpose “to commemorate the formation and signing on September 17, 1787, of the Constitution and recognize all who, by coming of age or by naturalization, have become citizens.” The history of Constitution Day goes back to 1952 when Congress passed a joint resolution (66 Stat. 9) that designated September 17 as Citizenship Day. In 1956, another joint resolution (70 Stat. 932) established September 17 through 23 as Constitution Week. Public Law 105-225 revised and codified laws related to “Patriotic and National Observances” as Title 36 of the United States Code in 1998. In 2005, Congress passed Public Law 108-447 that added “Constitution Day” to the law and mandated ” the civil and educational authorities of States, counties, cities, and towns are urged to make plans for the proper observance of Constitution Day and Citizenship Day and for the complete instruction of citizens in their responsibilities and opportunities as citizens of the United States and of the State and locality in which they reside.”

To mark the event at Brooklyn Law School, Constitutional Law Professors Bill Araiza, Joel Gora, Susan Herman, and Andrew Napolitano will conduct a discussion on the most significant Supreme Court cases of the last term. These include the Hobby Lobby case and cases about campaign finance, affirmative action, and cell phone searches. The professors will also address issues likely to come before the Court in the near future, including the status of cases about the right to marriage equality. Students are encouraged to attend and participate in a Q & A with the faculty members.

On Saturday, September 13 at 12:00 pm noon, BLS Professor Susan Herman who serves as ACLU president will appear on the long-running television show Open Mind on PBS Channel THIRTEEN/WNET to consider the 2014 Supreme Court decisions and their impact on individual liberty. She explores the Hobby Lobby case, among others, as well as how to balance privacy and national security concerns. The show will also air on CUNY TV at 9:30 am & 8:30 pm Sundays and 8:00 am & 2:00/8:00 pm Mondays.

ObsoleteThe BLS Library Law Library has an extensive collection of books on the Constitution, its history and interpretation. To locate books on the history of the Constitution, use the SARA catalog to conduct a subject search using the phrase: United States — Constitutional history. Some recent acquisitions in the BLS Library collection include Is the American Constitution Obsolete? by Thomas J. Main (Call #KF4550 .M255 2013), a comprehensive one-volume debate on the pros and cons of our basic law and how it deals with questions such as judicial review, political gridlock, direct election of the president and the future of the electoral college. It is ideal reading for courses that cover the Constitution.

CitizenAnother recent acquisition to the BLS Library collection on the subject is A Citizen’s Guide to the Constitution and the Supreme Court: Constitutional Conflict in American Politics by Morgan Marietta (Call #KF4550.Z9 M275 2014). The author provides an overview of the perspectives from the leading schools of constitutional interpretation–textualism, common law constitutionalism, originalism, and living constitutionalism. He discusses the points of conflict and competing schools of thought in the context of several landmark cases and ends with advice to readers on how to interpret constitutional issues ourselves.

Greetings and Salutations

The Fall semester has started and everyone at the BLS Library is looking forward to working with you towards a successful new year.

Just a few reminders –

The Library has resumed its regular hours

  • Monday – Thursday           8:00 am – 12:00 am
  • Friday                                   8:00 am – 10:00 pm
  • Saturday                              9:00 am – 10:00 pm
  • Sunday                               10:00 am – 12:00 am

Reference Desk Hours

  • Monday – Thursday            9:00 am – 8:00 pm
  • Friday                                   9:00 am – 6:00 pm
  • Saturday                               Noon – 5:00 pm

If you haven’t done it already, check out OneSearch on the Library’s Web page.  You can now search the catalog plus multiple databases using this new service.

onesearchchatAnd don’t forget the Library’s Chat Service, also available on our web page.   Librarians are   available to chat during regularly scheduled reference hours.  If you do not get a response back, please leave your email address or phone number, and someone will get in touch with you as soon as possible.

Looking forward to working with you in the coming year!

 

Mulligan on US Constitution Translations

Brooklyn Law School Assistant Professor of Law Christina Mulligan, who recently joined the faculty of the Law School where she will be teaching Internet Law, Cybercrime, and Intellectual Property, has co-authored an interesting new article. Written with Michael Douma of James Madison University, Hans Lind of Yale University, and Brian Patrick Quinn, the article is entitled Founding-Era Translations of the United States Constitution. It is posted on SSRN. The abstract reads:

Before its ratification, the United States Constitution was translated into German and Dutch for the German- and Dutch-speaking populations of Pennsylvania and New York. Although copies of both the German- and Dutch-language translations have been preserved, they have largely escaped analysis — and public awareness — until now. This paper provides historical context for these translations and analyzes how they might aid our interpretation of the U.S. Constitution in the present day.

Supplemental to this article is an appendix containing the German and Dutch translations, as well as extensive commentary on the translations, also available at SSRN at this link.

BLIP Clinic Fights Off Patent Troll

The recent success of Brooklyn Law School’s BLIP clinic in bringing about the dismissal of the patent infringement case of 911 Notify LLC v. Carshield Services Inc. filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware demonstrates how law students help real clients. The BLIP students represented a California-based startup called CarShield in defending a patent infringement lawsuit filed in January of this year. The complaint came with no prior notice, no warning and no demand letter. The plaintiff, a shell company called 911 Notify, appeared to be a classic patent troll. Since 2013, it had filed more than 35 patent infringement suits, including some against such companies as Ford Motor Co., Lowe’s Home Centers and BMW North America. The defendant determined that what the plaintiff really wanted was a settlement of over $250,000 to make the lawsuit go away.

CarShield, which makes a car-connection device to monitor and alert owners and emergency contacts in case of accident, breakdown or theft, had no intention of paying. Through the Patent Troll Defense Network, a group set up by the App Developers Alliance and law schools to help app developers and small businesses, they found the Brooklyn Law Incubator and Policy (BLIP) clinic. With BLIP’s help, six months after being served with the complaint, 911 Notify dropped the lawsuit. BLIP was able to fend off the plaintiff thanks to Brooklyn Law School students and their lawyer-adviser.

Brooklyn Law School Professor Jonathan Askin, Founder and Director of BLIP, showed his students the CarShield case and they agreed to take it on. Professor Askin said “They felt it was so egregious and a part of a systemic problem faced by startups. They knew a lot of companies couldn’t afford to litigate, but they would if they had support.”

Patent trolls win by offering to settle cases for less than the cost of the legal defense. With the help of the BLIP law school clinic, the cost of legal defense dropped to zero. In April, the students filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the case should not have been filed in Delaware because the startup is based in California and had never sold its products in Delaware. By July, all briefs had been filed and the team of students was preparing for oral argument. On July 24, the day after CarShield formally requested the court schedule oral argument, 911 Notify officially dropped the lawsuit, without prejudice.

Patent TrollsBrooklyn Law School Law Library has ordered a book on the subject of patent trolls, Patent Trolls: Predatory Litigation and the Smothering of Innovation by William J. Watkins Jr. and William F. Shughart II. It describes how patent trolls use overbroad patents to threaten litigation and bring infringement suits against inventors. Also known as non-practicing entities (NPEs), patent trolls typically do not produce products or services but are in the business of litigation. They wait for someone to create a process or product that has some relationship to the patent held by the troll, and then they pounce with threats and lawsuits. The authors call attention to this problem and the challenges it poses to maintaining a robust rate of technological progress. After describing recent trends and efforts to “tame the trolls,” the book focuses on ground zero in patent litigation—the Eastern District of Texas, where a combination of factors makes this the lawsuit venue of choice for strategically minded patent trolls. It also examines a more fundamental problem: an outmoded patent system that is wholly ill suited for the modern economy. Finally, the book examines proposals for reforming the U.S. patent system, which was created to spur innovation but today is having the opposite effect.