Shaping the Law
Courts Citing Toledo Law Review
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
In DeFunis v. Odegaard, 416 U.S. 312 (1974) the Court was confronted with whether a law school applicant's constitutional rights were violated when he was denied admission. Because the student was eventually admitted to the law school by operation of lower courts, the Supreme Court dismissed the case as moot. However, in Justice Douglas' dissenting opinion, he felt that the case was not moot. In his dissent, Justice Douglas quoted Sanford Jay Rosen, Equalizing Access to Legal Education: Special Programs for Law Students Who Are Not Admissible by Traditional Criteria, 2 U. Tol. L. Rev. 321 (1970). In quoting this piece, Justice Douglas recognized that although law schools use LSAT and undergraduate GPAs to determine admission, though these may not be correlative to success in law school, it is still a valid admission factor that schools utilize to determine admission.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
In Breed v. Jones, 421 U.S. 419 (1975) the Court cited to James G. Carr, The Effect of the Double Jeopardy Clause on Juvenile Proceedings, 6 U. Tol. L. Rev. 1 (1974) to note that some jurisdictions allow the possibility of a juvenile criminal defendant to be transferred from a juvenile court to a court of general criminal jurisdiction, and to provide an analysis of jurisdictions that do so.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, SECOND CIRCUIT
In Abdin v. CBS Broad. Inc., 971 F.3d 57 (2d Cir. 2020) the court set out to determine whether the television series Star Trek: Discovery unlawfully infringed upon a game developer's video game concept. To help understand the concept of Star Trek, the court utilized a U. Tol. L. Rev. publication: Michael P. Scharf & Lawrence D. Roberts, The Interstellar Relations of the Federation: International Law and "Star Trek: The Next Generation", 25 U. Tol. L. Rev. 577 (1994).
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, FIRST CIRCUIT
In Parent/Prof'l Advocacy League v. City of Springfield, Massachusetts, 934 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2019) the court faced an appeal from the United States District court for the District of Massachusetts for the denial of a class-action certification with the plaintiff consisting of an organization and a student with mental health disabilities. In determining the ability of class certifications, the court cited a Toledo Law Review publication, Mark C. Weber, Idea Class Actions After Wal-Mart v. Dukes, 45 U. Tol. L. Rev. 471 (2014), to demonstrate when the commonality standard of class actions may be satisfied by certifying sub-classes.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, D. MARYLAND
In Medigrow, LLC v. Natalie M. LaPrade Med. Cannabis Comm'n, No. CV RDB-20-0504, 2020 WL 5544184 (D. Md. Sept. 16, 2020), the court found that states have the individual right to legislate usage of medical marijuana. In reaching this, the court cited to John Vigorito, Creating Constitutional Cannabis: An Individual State's Tenth Amendment Right to Legalize Marijuana, 46 U. Tol. L. Rev. 221 (2014) as an outline of state rights in the realm of marijuana legislation.
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
In State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers v. Sheward, 86 Ohio St.3d 451, 715 N.E.2d 1062 (1999) the Supreme Court of Ohio cited to David M. Gold, Public Aid to Private Enterprise under the Ohio Constitutions: Sections 4, 6, and 13 of Article VIII Historical Perspective, 16 U. Tol. L. Rev. 405 (1985) to demonstrate how the Ohio Legislature had become involved in the subsidization of private companies and granting special privileges in corporate charges. The Supreme Court of Ohio also used this piece to outline a historical perspective and varied effects the legislature's actions caused.
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE
In Matter of Beauregard, 189 A.3d 1236 (Del. 2018) the court found that a Delaware attorney violated rules regarding safekeeping property and inaccurately filed certificates of compliance when aware the violation included dishonesty, fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation. When determining sanctions, the court referenced Jeanne M. Whalen, Safekeeping Client Property: Why the ABA is Hands-Off and the States Are Hand-Holding, 38 U. Tol. L. Rev. 1279 (2007) to find that lawyers, acting in a custodial capacity, requires paramount trust and strict sanctions for misconduct in the area.
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA
In Fitzpatrick v. Hoehn, 262 So. 3d 613 (Ala. 2018) a plaintiff attempted to bring a claim for tortious interference of an inheritance. At the time, Alabama had not set forth elements required for a tortious interference with an inheritance, but cited to Irene D. Johnson, Tortious Interference with Expectancy of Inheritance or Gift Suggestions for Resort to the Tort, 39 U Tol. L. Rev. 769 (2008) to demonstrate the commonly accepted elements of tortious interference with an expectancy.
SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON
In State v. Luther, 134 P.3d 205 (Wash. 2006), the court was tasked with determining whether a Washington law prohibiting child pornography was constitutional. In expounding its analysis, the court cited to Robert M. Sieg, Attempted Possession of Child Pornography-A Proposed Approach for Criminalizing Possession of Child Pornographic Images of Unknown Origin, 36 U. Tol. L. Rev. 263 (2005) to outline compelling policy arguments in further criminalizing child pornography.
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI
In Howard v. State, 300 So.3d 1011 (Miss. 2020) Justice Griffis, dissenting from the majority opinion of the Supreme Court of Mississippi, utilized S. Keiser-Nelson, Forensic Odontology, 1 U. Tol. L. Rev. 633 (1969) to assist in an analysis evaluating the credibility of a criminal defendant's expert witness.