<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part</title>
		<description>The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part</description>
		<link>http://www.yalelawjournal.org</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 06:49:24 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>FeedCreator 1.7.2</generator>
		<item>
			<title>Marriage, Property and [In]Equality: Remedying ERISA's Disparate Impact on Spousal Wealth</title>
			<link>http://www.yalelawjournal.org/content/view/828/23/</link>
			<description>Congress is considering pension reform in the wake of the tremendous loss in market value of retirement plans during the current recession. This offers a historic moment to remedy an unintended but profound gender disparity embedded in the federal law governing retirement plans in this country. 
</description>
			<author>Paula A. Monopoli</author>
			<category>The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part - Property Law</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:03:07 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>The Mess of Manifest Disregard</title>
			<link>http://www.yalelawjournal.org/content/view/817/23/</link>
			<description>
A circuit split is in the making, and it could signal a shift with significant implications for federal arbitration law. Just eighteen months after the U.S. Supreme Court&amp;rsquo;s March 25, 2008 decision in the controversial case of Hall Street Associates v. Mattel, Inc. (#), three circuits are already in ripe disagreement as to whether Hall Street abrogates the half-century old, judicially-created doctrine of &amp;ldquo;manifest disregard.&amp;rdquo; 


Manifest disregard is a common-law exception to the limited grounds for vacatur of arbitral awards enumerated in the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). (#)  This doctrine empowers courts to refuse to enforce awards that evince a &amp;ldquo;manifest
disregard of the law,&amp;rdquo; understood to mean a willful defiance of clearly
applicable law, not just garden-variety legal error. It has always
been controversial for at least two reasons.  

</description>
			<author>Hiro N. Aragaki</author>
			<category>The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part - Scholarship</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 11:07:49 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Announcing The Yale Law Journal Online</title>
			<link>http://www.yalelawjournal.org/content/view/772/23/</link>
			<description>The Yale Law Journal is pleased to announce the launch of The Yale Law Journal Online in the Fall of 2009. YLJ Online will integrate the current features of The Pocket Part with additional fora for legal scholarship. The YLJ Online Committee will continue to consider submissions under The Pocket Part&amp;#39;s guidelines and submissions system throughout the summer.  
</description>
			<author>The YLJ Online Committee</author>
			<category>The Yale Law Journal Pocket Part - Scholarship</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 16:46:02 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
