The eJournal is sponsored by the Syracuse University College of Law Disability Law and Policy (DLP) Program of the Syracuse University Center on Human Policy, Law, and Disability Studies (CHPLDS). The DLP Program sponsors a range of law school academic programs and co-curricular activities, including the first joint degree program in law and disability studies. The Program is part of the CHPLDS which is the first such university-wide network of academic programs, centers, student organizations, and affiliated faculty whose research, teaching, and advocacy promotes the rights of people with disabilities locally, nationally, and globally.
DISABILITY LAW eJOURNAL
Sponsored by Syracuse University Disability Law & Policy (DLP) Program
Columbia Law Review, Forthcoming
MAGGIE WITTLIN, Columbia University - Law School
Judges and juries are frequently called upon to evaluate a party’s actions in retrospect — with the benefit of hindsight. Traditionally, courts and scholars have been understandably wary about how hindsight bias influences verdicts, focusing on how to keep outcome information away from jurors and how to minimize its influence on adjudication. But outcome information can be probative evidence: bad outcomes can be indicative of bad decisionmaking. In this Article I aim to rehabilitate the use of outcome information by conceptualizing it as a new category of evidence: hindsight evidence. I create a framework for deciding how much weight to afford hindsight evidence and whether it should be admitted to a jury under Rule 403, which requires judges to weigh probative value against prejudicial impact. As for relevance and probative weight, I show that hindsight evidence is probative to the extent that facts supporting one party’s theory of the case have a greater tendency to generate that outcome than facts supporting the other party’s theory. As for prejudice, I review the research on hindsight bias and the factors that mitigate its impact. I apply this framework to four paradigmatic examples from diverse areas of the law — civil rights, contracts, education/disability law, and civil procedure — where courts have disagreed about whether to consider hindsight evidence. Ultimately, I conclude that a deeper theoretical understanding of how hindsight evidence operates will allow courts to embrace its value more readily.
"Exploring Disability Disadvantage: How Can the Workplace Be Made More Inclusive for People with Disability?"
Presented at the third session of the New South Wales Industrial Relations Commission’s President's Forum, August 2015
PAUL DAVID HARPUR, University of Queensland - T.C. Beirne School of Law
This presentation will critically analyse the key drivers of disability disadvantage in the labour market and explore how laws and policies can create more inclusive workplaces. This presentation argues that employers can help promote disability inclusive workplaces, but ignoring the wider causes of inequality is arguably unfair on employers and will not achieve meaningful results.
Disability scholars, particularly those from the social model and human rights schools, contend that ability difference is simply an aspect of human diversity. This ability difference is turned into disability when barriers in society disable people with impairments. These barriers include, inter alia, physical (the decision to put in stairs rather than ramps), attitudinal (inflexibly adopting practices that have discriminatory impacts) or educational (erroneously believing people with disabilities do not make valuable workers).
This presentation will use these three barriers to workplace inclusion to illustrate how the struggle for equality requires increased attention on parties beyond the employment relationship.
About this eJournal
Sponsored by: Syracuse University Disability Law & Policy (DLP) Program.
This eJournal distributes working and accepted paper abstracts which address issues of domestic, comparative, and international disability law and policy and disability studies, including issues related to mental health and mental disability law and policy. The eJournal addresses legal issues, legislation, policy and a critical examination of disability as part of diversity in the US and in other societies throughout the world.
Editor: Arlene S. Kanter, Syracuse University
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.
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
Legal Scholarship Network (LSN), a division of Social Science Electronic Publishing (SSEP) and Social Science Research Network (SSRN)
LSN SUBJECT MATTER EJOURNALS
BERNARD S. BLACK
Northwestern University - School of Law, Northwestern University - Kellogg School of Management, European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)
RONALD J. GILSON
Stanford Law School, Columbia Law School, European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)
Please contact us at the above addresses with your comments, questions or suggestions for LSN-Sub.