Announcements

The views expressed in the Legal Information & Technology eJournal are those of the contributing authors and do not imply the endorsement of the sponsor, advisory board, or editors.

The Legal Information & Technology eJournal is sponsored by the Academic Law Libraries Special Interest Section (ALL-SIS). The purpose of the Section is to provide a forum for the exchange of ideas and information on academic law libraries and to represent its members' interests and concerns within the American Association of Law Libraries. The eJournal is also sponsored by the Mid-America Association of Law Libraries (MAALL), an official chapter of the American Association of Law Libraries. MAALL includes members from academic, court, and law firm libraries in Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and South Dakota.



LEGAL INFORMATION & TECHNOLOGY eJOURNAL
Sponsored by the Academic Law Libraries Special Interest Section of the American Association
of Law Libraries and the Mid-America Association of Law Libraries

"Housing as Holdout: Segregation in American Neighborhoods" Free Download
Tulsa Law Review, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 329-339 (2015)
Northeastern University School of Law Research Paper No. 227-2015

RASHMI DYAL-CHAND, Northeastern University - School of Law
Email:

How far have people who are not African American gone to keep African Americans out of their neighborhoods? And how far might they go? These are the questions that link the three recent books on housing reviewed in this article: Jeannine Bell, Hate Thy Neighbor: Move-In Violence and the Persistence of Racial Segregation in American Housing; Richard R.W. Brooks and Carol M. Rose, Saving the Neighborhood: Racially Restrictive Covenants, Law and Social Norms; and Douglas S. Massey et al., Climbing Mount Laurel: The Struggle for Affordable Housing and Social Mobility in an American Suburb.

"Engaging the Third Sovereign: The Nature, Reach, and Sources of Tribal Law" Free Download
Wisconsin Lawyer, 47, May 2015
Univ. of Wisconsin Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1351

BONNIE J. SHUCHA, University of Wisconsin Law School
Email:

This article attempts to clarify some of the confusion surrounding tribal law, which, notably, is distinct from federal Indian law. Whereas federal Indian law concerns the relationship between federal, state, and tribal governments, tribal law is the law tribes develop and apply to their members and territories. This article explores the nature of tribal government, reviews tribes' complex relationships with federal and state governments, examines the reach of tribal law, and highlights available sources of tribal law.

"What We Know About Contract Law and Transacting in the Marketplace – A Review Essay" Free Download
Adelaide Law Review, 2014
U. of Adelaide Law Research Paper No. 2015-02

JOHN GAVA, Adelaide Law School
Email:

A review essay of Catherine Mitchell, Contract Law and Contract Law Practice: Bridging the Gap between Legal Reasoning and Commercial Expectation and Jonathan Morgan, Contract Law Minimalism: A Formalist Restatement of Commercial Contract Law.

Since Stewart Macaulay’s pioneering work on the use and non-use of contract law in the market two competing schools of thought have emerged to explain the appropriate way to judge contract disputes before the courts. The first, contextualism, argues that judges, in deciding contract disputes and developing the law, should give effect to the expectations, practices and desires of the business community. The alternative, formalism, argues that since business uses law selectively it would be counterproductive if the law were anything other than predictable. The books reviewed synthesise the scholarship surrounding this debate and, in so doing, each proposes the form of judging thought to be the most suitable. In this review I will argue that when viewed against the arguments of two giants in this field, Macaulay himself and Hugh Collins, it becomes apparent that Mitchell’s careful, well-explained and balanced contextualism is ultimately unpersuasive and that Morgan’s formalist defence makes much more sense. I will also argue, however, that the differences between Mitchell and Morgan are ultimately tactical because both see contract law in instrumental terms. Both understand the role of contract law as being to aid and enhance market exchange but differ over how this is best achieved. I will argue that both are wrong on this point and that there are historical, constitutional and institutional reasons for not seeing contract law in instrumentalist terms.

"Book Review: Randall Kennedy, 'For Discrimination: Race, Affirmative Action, and the Law', New York: Random House, 2013, Pp. 304, $25.95." Free Download
Journal of Legal Education, Vol. 64, No. 3 (2015)

MAE KUYKENDALL, Michigan State University College of Law
Email:

In this book, For Discrimination: Race, Affirmative Action, and the Law, Professor Randall Kennedy provides adroit and accessible combination of historical context, legal doctrine, and cultural awareness about race in America. Kennedy describes how legal and political voices have consistently over time explained versions of “race is different.? He balances concessions to negatives about benign “discrimination? [against] unvarnished moral censure of the racial wrongs of the past, and present. He mixes measured conclusions about the net positives of affirmative action, weighed against a fully stocked and conceded catalogue of negatives, with blunt contempt for silly claims and with stern moral accounting. The claim to be, or to aspire to be, a color-blind society is not a new one. Kennedy traces its earliest beginnings to its provenance in the civil rights movement as a preemptive defense against claims of racial favoritism to its contemporary expression the opinions of the Supreme Court.

Kennedy provides a clear and morally compelling statement of the case for affirmative action. “The affirmative action ethos is not a necessary evil; it is a positive good.? By “good,? Kennedy means, in American circumstances, a moral necessity. There is therefore no need of apologetics or “anxiety about an endpoint? in the American practice of affirmative action. Rather, for Kennedy, affirmative action is the responsible choice for a society faced with a history of deep injustice and continuing large disparities that can be traced to formal and relatively recent state-facilitated racial harms.

Nonetheless, in a moral bounty of modulated yet blunt assessment of America’s record on race, Kennedy’s advice is not without flaw. He acknowledges and defends as necessary the most cited harms and costs associated with racially conscious government awards of benefits. The harm of special concern in democratic society is a hypocrisy by elites masking in the language of diversity their real motive: that of rectifying racial wrongs. Kennedy fails to credit the weight of the damage done by manipulative rationales, used by academic administrators who, in Kennedy’s words, have relied for decades on “the ritualistic, incantatory repetition of the terms ‘diversity’ and ‘holistic’....? In opposing a categorical ban on racially sensitive admissions, Kennedy opines that depriving administrators of a language they have mastered would be costly. But the empowerment of administrators with a language of misdirection and evasion is a net loss to the discursive vitality of the American university, as students and faculty avoid reviving the linguistic void — direct discussion of race — that an evasive rationale creates.

Many of the conceded costs of affirmative action surely arise from a cynicism generated by the perceived deceptions of academic bureaucrats. Experimentation to replace harmfully evasive administrative speech with discourse-liberating programmatic design might be the prudent, not the risky course.

With his modulated and reasoned moral accounting, Professor Kennedy is a good candidate for helping move the governing rhetoric of race in our law and culture away from evasion and faux forms of engagement in the university. The moral rationale for diversity admissions needs a stronger base in genuine collaboration among the members of the university community and a defensible programmatic plan to make diversity a building block for a first-ever practice of open discourse about race in America.

Let us hope for a sequel that matches Professor Kennedy’s sound diagnosis with a remedy for evasion and silence that imagines race as the insoluble problem, to which American democracy and open deliberation are unequal.

"Two Ways of Knowing International Law" Free Download
(2014) Leiden Journal of International Law 525

VILJAM ENGSTRÖM, Åbo Akademi University
Email:

In looking for a textbook to use for educational purposes, the teacher in international law has a number of excellent alternatives to choose from. This review essay looks at two recent contributions: Jan Klabbers' "International Law", published by Cambridge University Press in 2013, and the eighth edition of Ian Brownlie´s "Principles of Public International Law" from 2012 written by James Crawford, from the perspective of teachers and students of international law.

"Dynamic Essential Modeling of Organization (DEMO) Towards the Legal Domain" Free Download

R.K.A.R. KARIAPPER, Sabaragamuwa University of Sri Lanka - Department of Computing and Information Systems
Email:
PRASAD M JAYAWEERA, University of Sri Jayewardenepura
Email:

It is realized that, necessity of having optimal way of reducing complexity and inter-operable issues in any organization regardless of the domains. Today most of the enterprises starve for above said issues in their own level of complexity and inter-operable issues. The enterprise is supported tremendously with the development of suitable organizational and well optimized operational structure. The legal domain is one of the driving forces of any government in order to maintain the peace among the nation. Still, the legal domain experiences the issues stated above due to complex courts regulations, domain procedures, individual rights, number of pending cases, number participation in a case and decision making with the evidence. The Dynamic Essential Modelling of Organization (DEMO) is a theory to construction and operation of any enterprises. The intended result is provided through the standard pattern of the transaction via series of communication acts. The legal domain is rich in more communicational agenda and more number of participants in a single case. Thus DEMO can be successfully applied due to optimal constructional pattern and the optimal operational acts. More than this, the DEMO provides re-engineering and re-designing options to the designers. Thus the judicial courts procedure and the organization can be restructured break the barrier of complexity and inter-operable issues.

^top

About this eJournal

Sponsored by: the Academic Law Libraries Special Interest Section of the American Association of Law Libraries and the Mid-America Association of Law Libraries.


This eJournal distributes working and accepted paper abstracts in all areas of legal information scholarship. Topics include (but are not limited to): 1) the impact of legal information on domestic, comparative, and international legal systems; 2) the treatment of legal information authorities and precedents (e.g., citation studies); 3) the examination of rules, practices, and commentary limiting or expanding applications of legal information (e.g., citation to unpublished opinions and to foreign law); 4) the study of economic, legal, political and social conditions limiting or extending access to legal information (e.g., trends in the legal publishing industry, intellectual property regimes, and open access initiatives); 5) the finding and use of legal information by academics to produce legal scholarship, by law students to learn the law, by attorneys in practice, and by judges and others decisionmakers to determine legal outcomes; 6) the history of legal information systems and technological advancements; 7) legal information system design and assessment; and 8) the relationship of substantive areas of law (such as information law, intellectual freedom, intellectual property, and national security law) and other academic disciplines (e.g., information science) to legal information. This includes the scholarship of law librarians, other legal scholars, and other academic disciplines.

The eJournal also includes working papers, forthcoming articles, recently published articles, and selected documents (such as White Papers, briefings, reports, course materials) on the practice of law librarianship. Submissions are welcome in all areas of law librarianship including: 1) administration, management, and leadership; 2) facility design and construction; 3) evaluating and marketing law library services; 4) all aspects of public, technical, and technology services; 5) collection development, including sample collection development policies and procedures; 6) electronic resource management and development including licensing, digitization, and institutional repositories; 7) research and reference services; and 8) legal research instruction teaching methods and substantial or innovative course materials.

Editors: Randy J. Diamond, University of Missouri, and Lee F. Peoples, Oklahoma City University

Submissions

To submit your research to SSRN, sign in to the SSRN User HeadQuarters, click the My Papers link on left menu and then the Start New Submission button at top of page.

Distribution Services

If your organization is interested in increasing readership for its research by starting a Research Paper Series, or sponsoring a Subject Matter eJournal, please email: RPS@SSRN.com

Distributed by

Legal Scholarship Network (LSN), a division of Social Science Electronic Publishing (SSEP) and Social Science Research Network (SSRN)

Directors

LSN SUBJECT MATTER EJOURNALS

BERNARD S. BLACK
Northwestern University - School of Law, Northwestern University - Kellogg School of Management, European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)
Email: bblack@northwestern.edu

RONALD J. GILSON
Stanford Law School, Columbia Law School, European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)
Email: rgilson@leland.stanford.edu

Please contact us at the above addresses with your comments, questions or suggestions for LSN-Sub.

Advisory Board

Legal Information & Technology eJournal

DUNCAN ALFORD
Associate Dean/ Director of the Law Library, University of South Carolina School of Law, Associate Dean for the Law Library & Associate Professor of Law, University of South Carolina - Coleman Karesh Law Library

BARBARA BINTLIFF
Professor, University of Texas School of Law

GEORGIA BRISCOE
Associate Director and Head of Technical Services, William A. Wise Law Library, University of Colorado Law School

PAUL D. CALLISTER
Library Director & Associate Professor of Law, University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law - Leon E. Bloch Law Library

MICHAEL CHIORAZZI
Associate Dean for Information Services, Professor of Law, Professor of Information Resources and Library Science, and Editor, Legal Reference Services Quarterly, University of Arizona - James E. Rogers College of Law, Cracchiolo Law Library

RICHARD A. DANNER
Rufty Research Professor of Law & Senior Associate Dean for Information Services, Duke University School of Law

MARK ENGSBERG
Assistant Professor of Law and Director of Library Services, Emory University School of Law - Hugh F. MacMillan Law Library

PENNY A. HAZELTON
University of Washington - School of Law, Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Library and Computing Services, University of Washington School of Law - Gallagher Law Library

MARCI HOFFMAN
International & Foreign Law Librarian, University of California School of Law Library - Boalt Hall Law Library

MARY A. HOTCHKISS
Director, Academic Advising, Senior Law Lecturer, University of Washington School of Law

RICHARD A. LEITER
Professor of Law and Director, University of Nebraska College of Law, Schmid Law Library

CAROL A. PARKER
Associate Dean for Finance & Administration; Professor of Law, University of New Mexico School of Law

MARYLIN J. RAISCH
Associate Law Librarian for International and Foreign Law, Georgetown University Law Library

JANET SINDER
Library Director and Associate Professor, Brooklyn Law School