A Legal-Conceptual Framework for the School-to-Prison Pipeline: Fewer Opportunities for Rehabilitation for Public School Students
Brian J. Fahey
I. Introduction
II. Three Models for Regulating Juvenile Conduct ... A. The Criminal Punishment Model ... 1. Rights Attendant to the Criminal Punishment Model ... 2. A Framework for Recognizing Criminal Punishment ... B. The Juvenile Justice Model ... 1. Rehabilitative Beginnings ... 2. Recognizing Due Process Rights in Juvenile Justice ... 3. A Retributive Renaissance in Juvenile Courts ... C. The School Discipline Model ... 1. Sparse Constitutional Origins ... 2. Students’ Rights and Punishment in Schools ... a. Goss v. Lopez ... b. Ingraham v. Wright ... 3. What Goss and Ingraham Tell Us about Students’ Rights in School
III. The School-to-Prison Pipeline ... A. Zero-Tolerance Policies ... B. Referral of Students to the Juvenile System for Misconduct in School ... C. The Rise of the School Resource Officer
IV. The Negative Consequences of the Pipeline ... A. Counterproductive Results ... B. Disproportionate Effect on Minority and Learning-Disabled Students ... C. Discipline without a Purpose
V. Conclusion
Practice and Procedure before the Nebraska State Railway Commission
J. Max Harding
I. Introduction
II. The Original or Extension Application
III. The Transfer Application
IV. Orders to Show Cause and Formal Complaints
V. After the Hearing
VI. Conclusion
Standing on Thin Ice: How Nebraska’s Standing Doctrine Prevents the Majority of Surface Water Users from Obtaining Judicial Relief against Groundwater Users Interfering with Their Appropriations
Logan Hoyt
I. Introduction
II. Background ... A. Water Development in Nebraska ... B. Spear T Ranch, Inc. v. Knaub ... C. Introduction to Standing Doctrine
III. Standing in Water Law Cases ... A. Natural Resource Districts and Standing to Challenge Governmental Actions ... B. Surface Water Entities and Standing ... C. Contrast between Natural Resources District Standing Cases and Central ... D. Nebraska’s Standing Doctrine Prevents Most Surface Water Users from Obtaining Relief
IV. Is It Good Public Policy to Allow Surface Water Users to Pursue Judicial Relief? ... A. Arguments in Favor of Judicial Intervention ... B. Arguments against Allowing Surface Water Irrigators to Obtain Judicial Relief ... C. Policy Summary
V. If Surface Water Irrigators Should Be Able to Sue, What Changes Can Be Made? ... A. Legislative Intervention ... B. Judicial Intervention
VI. Conclusion
Judicial Bypass in Nebraska: How the Nebraska Supreme Court’s Decision in In re Anonymous 5, 286 Neb. 640, 838 N.W.2d 226 (2013) Illustrates the Complexity of Parental Consent Laws for State Wards Seeking Abortion
Amy J. Peters
I. Introduction
II. Background ... A. Parental Consent Laws for Minors Seeking Abortion ... B. Teen Pregnancy and Abortion in Foster Care ... C. Nebraska’s Parental Consent Law and the Supreme Court’s Holding in Anonymous 5
III. Analysis ... A. Nebraska’s Parental Consent Law Grants Judges an Impermissible, “Absolute, and Possibly Arbitrary, Veto” over a State Ward’s Access to Abortion ... B. Nebraska’s Parental Consent Law Imposes an Undue Burden on State Wards Seeking an Abortion ... C. Nebraska’s Abortion Law Needs Reform to Clarify Parental Consent Requirements and Judicial Bypass Considerations for State Wards ... 1. Consent Requirements ... 2. Judicial Bypass Considerations
IV. Conclusion
The Family Automobile Policy
Curtis M. Elliott
I. Introduction
II. Eligibility Considerations
III. Persons Insured
IV. Non-owned Automobile Coverage
V. Trailers
VI. Stolen Automobiles
VII. The Future
Inconsistent Jury Verdicts in Civil Actions
John C. McElhaney
I. Vicarious Liability of Co-Defendant … A. General Problem and Solution … B. Joint Tortfeasors as Defendants … C. Indemnity Cases … D. The Comparative Negligence Doctrine
II. Derivative Causes of Action … A. General Problem and Solution … B. Power to Grant a New Trial … C. Who May Complain of the Inconsistency
III. Separate Cases Consolidated for Trial … A. General Problem and Solution … B. The Right to a Jury Trial
IV. Other Related Fact Situations
V. General Comments on Inconsistencies … A. Reconciliation of Apparent Inconsistencies in the Verdicts … B. Validity of General Verdicts Based on Alternative Pleas … C. Verdicts Which Are Silent as to One Party Defendant
VI. Conclusion
Effective Utilization of a Questioned Document Examiner
Winsor C. Moore
I. Introduction
II. Document Examination as a Profession … A. Historical Development … B. Qualifications of the Document Expert
III. Development of a Document Case by the Attorney … A. General … B. Evidence of Invalidity … C. Classification of Questioned Documents … D. Capabilities of a Qualified Document Examiner … E. Care and Preservation of Disputed Document … F. Interviews with Prospective Witnesses … G. Acquisition of Standards … 1. General … 2. Collected Standards … 3. Requested Standards … H. Collateral Study
IV. Function of Document Examiner upon Referral and before Trial … A. Referral to Document Examiner … B. Types of Examination Made by Trained Examiner … C. Report of the Document Examiner … D. Preparation of Document Examiner for Trial … E. Pre-Trial Conference
V. Trial … A. General … B. Proof of Genuine Specimens … C. Establishing Qualifications of Document Examiner … D. Direct Testimony … E. Cross-Examination … F. Redirect Examination … G. Weight Given to Testimony of Examiner
VI. Post-Trial Conference … A. Critique … B. Fees
VII. Conclusion