The Yale Law Journal

Results for '262'

Rethinking Rights After the Second Reconstruction

Ct. 2541 (No. 10-277). Id. at 262-65 (first and second emphases added). See generally Mark Kelman, Market Discrimination and Groups, 53 Stan. L. Rev

Forum: Shocking Business Bankruptcy Law

Motions to Dismiss, In re Nat’l Rifle Ass’n of Am., 628 B.R. 262 (Bankr. N.D. T… 11 U.S.C. § 1126 (2018) (describing voting requirements); id. § 1129

Forum: A Rosetta Stone for Causation

274 (1977). Additionally, courts routinely use quantitative-like language to describe causal concepts. See, e.g., Price Waterhouse, 490 U.S. at 262

Prisons as Laboratories of Antidemocracy

America’s 18th- and 19th-century slaveholders.”). See New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann, 285 U.S. 262, 311 (1932) (Brandeis, J., dissenting) (“It is one of the

Forum: The Unconvincing Case for Resale Royalties

seriously doubt that resale royalty rights will reduce the buyers’ willingness to pay. See, e.g., Hansmann & Santilli, supra note 19, at 262; Rub

Forum: No Entrenchment: Thomas on the Hobbs Act, the Ocasio Mess, and the Vagueness Doctrine

Racketeering Act.” Evans, 504 U.S. at 262. Justice Stevens later remarked that the legislative history of the Hobbs Act was “sparse and unilluminating with

The Weaponization of Attorney’s Fees in an Age of Constitutional Warfare

Matthew A. Shapiro, Distributing Civil Justice, 109 Geo. L.J. 1473, 1482 (2021) (descri… New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann, 285 U.S. 262, 311 (1932) (Brandeis

Forum: On Estimating Disparity and Inferring Causation: Sur-Reply to the U.S. Sentencing Commission Staff

advance while the exact timing of the Court’s decision was not known … Schmitt et al., , at 262; Starr & Rehavi, , at 33. Note that assessment of

Forum: Ordering Conduct Yet Evading Review: A Simple Step Toward Preserving Federal Supremacy

U.S. 383, 392-93 (1988); Babbitt v. United Farm Workers… See id. (citing Massachusetts v. Mellon, 262 U.S. 447, 488 (1923) (“If a case for preventive

Forum: The Agency Costs of Equal Treatment Clauses

buyer to the potential for appraisal arbitrage. Delaware General Corporate Law § 262 allows shareholders, after a merger, to petition the court to