Professor Matthew A. Shapiro presented the paper “Distributing Procedure” on Oct. 26 at the fifth annual Civil Procedure Workshop, which was held at the University of Texas School of Law in Austin.
View more information about the 2019 workshop on the University of School of Law website.
The post Prof. Matthew Shapiro Presents at 2019 Civil Procedure Workshop at University of Texas School of Law appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
The 2nd National Medical-Legal Trial Competition, hosted by the Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University and the Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, came to a spirited finale as Campbell University Norman Adrian Wiggins School of Law captured first place in the only mock trial contest in the country in which medical and law schools collaborate to simulate real-life expert testimony by doctors. The competition took place Nov. 1-3.
The 10 participating law schools competed in three preliminary rounds of a mock civil trial involving dueling medical experts. Each law school had been assigned a fourth-year student from the Zucker School of Medicine to serve as an expert witness. Opening rounds were held at the Nassau County Supreme Court, and the closing rounds were held at Hofstra Law’s Weitz & Luxenberg Trial Courtroom, which was recently redesigned and updated with the latest advancements in courtroom technology.
The winning team from Raleigh, North Carolina-based Campbell Law School consisted of Chamberlain Collier, Justin Hill, and Jake Terrell, with Zucker medical student Kayla Hackman serving as their expert witness.
“I was very impressed with the level of skill, knowledge, and poise displayed by both the law and medical students in this setting,” said New York State Supreme Court judge and Hofstra Law alum Hon. Arthur Diamond ’78, who served as the presiding judge in the final round. “Their collaboration and enthusiasm was especially impressive following a few days of rigorous competition.”
Students Breanna Brill, Myles Carroll, and Emin Drnovsek representing Chicago-Kent College of Law, with Zucker medical student Divya Shah serving as their expert witness, placed second in the competition, and St. John’s University School of Law and William & Mary Law School were semifinalists.
Other competition honors included:
• Best Expert Witness: Divya Shah, Zucker School of Medicine
• Best Use of an Expert: Emin Drnovsek, Chicago-Kent College of Law
• Outstanding Advocates in a Preliminary Round: Eric Gilliand, William & Mary Law School; William Healy, St. John’s School of Law; and Justin Hill, Campbell Law School
• Best Overall Advocate in a Preliminary Round: Myles Carroll, Chicago-Kent College of Law
This year each team had access to leading industry consultants from DOAR, a litigation-strategy and expert-witness consulting firm, for support with trial graphics and presentation. The contest featured more than 50 attorneys and judges, including nearly 20 doctors, who attended the competition to evaluate the students.
“I competed in mock trials as a Hofstra Law student; now I participate as an evaluator or a judge,” said Andres Sanchez ’15, who works in medical malpractice litigation. “We used to have law students pretend to be doctors in mock trials. It is impressive to involve and listen to the medical students, who understand the medical issues in the case, which makes the experience much more authentic for participants.”
Mock trial evaluator and Zucker School of Medicine professor of neurology/surgery Jamie Ullman, MD, pointed to the ability to collaborate as a multidisciplinary team as an invaluable aspect of the tournament. “It was great,” he said, “to watch the law students and medical students work on their parts [of the case] and bring it all together to present a solid, clear argument.”
For more information about the National Medical-Legal Trial Competition, please contact tournament director and faculty advisor to the Hofstra Trial Advocacy Association Jared Rosenblatt ’03 at lawjrr@hofstra.edu or Gino Farina, MD, assistant dean for clinical preparation for residency, at Gino.A.Farina@hofstra.edu.
The post Campbell Law School Wins 2nd National Medical-Legal Trial Competition, Hosted by Hofstra Law and Zucker School of Medicine appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Thank you to all who made 2018-2019 an incredible year at Hofstra Law. Here are select highlights from the academic year.
The post Hofstra Law 2018-2019 Year in Review appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Hofstra Law is offering the E. David Woycik, Jr. Intensive Trial Techniques Program during the 2020 Winter Intersession on Jan. 2-7, 9 a.m.-5 p.m. Registration is open now. The program is open to second- and third-year students who have completed the basic course in Evidence.
Visiting students from other law schools who are interested in taking the program should contact the Hofstra Law Office of Enrollment Management at lawadmissions@hofstra.edu or 516-463-5916 for information about how to apply.
The program, based upon the proven intensive methodology initially developed by the National Institute for Trial Advocacy (NITA) for practicing lawyers, offers students a unique opportunity to develop core litigation skills through a short-term, highly focused, hands-on course. This innovative “immersion” program uses a concentrated curriculum and extremely low student/faculty ratio — typically one faculty member for every five students — to provide basic training in all of the fundamental lawyering skills involved in civil and criminal trials.
“The trial skills that I learned in the program provided me with the fundamentals to succeed in trial advocacy, which opened many doors for me and helped me obtain interviews and eventually employment with a District Attorney’s office.” — Elizabeth Moran ’12
Students learn the essential aspects of courtroom litigation, including opening statements; summation; direct and cross examination; documentary evidence and expert testimony. The critical skills of settlement negotiation are introduced, as is the essential pretrial discovery technique of the deposition.
Over the course of the six-day program, students conduct both a bench trial and a jury trial, and their performances are individually reviewed by experienced attorney/teachers and by professional actors.
The post Hofstra Law Offers Intensive Trial Techniques Program in January 2020 appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Professor J. Scott Colesanti, who has taught EU law as part of four study abroad programs, and second-year student Suzanne Hassani, his teaching assistant, wrote the article “The GDPR: An Update, and a Hope,” which appears in the Nov. 1 print edition of New York Law Journal. The article was first published on the NYLJ website on Oct. 31.
In the article, Professor Colesanti and Ms. Hassani summarize the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation and copycat provisions in the U.S. The piece contrasts the rival approaches while providing hypotheticals for businesses, which are likely to be compelled to consider the long reach of the new European model.
Read the full article on the New York Law Journal website.
The post New York Law Journal Publishes Article by Prof. Scott Colesanti and Suzanne Hassani 2L on EU’s General Data Protection Regulation appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
The article “Merchant Authorized Consumer Cash Substitutes,” written by Norman I. Silber, associate dean for research and faculty development and professor of law, and Hofstra Law alumnus Steven Stites ’13, attorney at Stites Law LLC, has been published in the Fall 2019 issue of the Virginia Law & Business Review (Vol. 14, No. 1).
Abstract
Merchant Authorized Consumer Cash Substitutes (MACCS) have existed in one form or another for hundreds of years although without a generic name. At nineteenth century American railroad construction sites far from established towns, companies paid employees with “scrip.” Coca Cola, beginning in 1887 issued “coupons” which entitled bearers to a glass of soda. About the same time the Standard Oil Company — a customer — demanded “rebates” from railroads who shipped its oil. Descendants of these merchant-created substitutes are the MACCS of today — phenomena including today’s “Penny-Saver Coupons,” “Groupons,” “Gift Cards,” “Disney Dollars,” “E-bates,” “Air Miles,” “Rewards Points,” and “cash-back offers.” There are countless tangible and virtual MACCS. The authors offer a functional definition in this initial approach to the subject. They explore the desirability for consumers and merchants of a unified and comprehensive treatment of this subject and recommend a new federal statute, or an Article of the Uniform Commercial Code which would address such matters as warranties, insolvency risks, deceptive and misleading practices, fungibility, frozen value, essential disclosures and privacy protection.
The post Article by Prof. Norman Silber and Alumnus Steven Stites ’13 Published in Virginia Law & Business Review appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Judge Gail Prudenti, Dean, spoke with Above the Law on Oct. 17 to discuss Hofstra Law’s approach to preparing students for the new legal marketplace in the article “The Attorney of Tomorrow: One Law School’s Approach to Preparing Students for the Future of Legal Practice.”
In the Q&A article, Judge Prudenti discussed topics including the influence of her judicial background on her views about educating the next generation of attorneys, the most important skills for law school graduates to have, Hofstra Law’s expanded legal-technology offerings, the Law School’s emphasis on specialization and its interdisciplinary approach to practice, and new projects at Hofstra Law.
Read the full article on the Above the Law website.
The post Judge Gail Prudenti, Dean, Discusses Hofstra Law’s Approach to Preparing Students for the Future of Legal Practice With Above the Law appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Hofstra Law student Brian Primm 1L has been selected as the 2019-2020 recipient of the Moritt Hock & Hamroff Business Law Honors Fellowship.
The fellowship, which was established in May 2016, is awarded to an incoming law student who has demonstrated outstanding academic achievements and an interest in pursuing a career in business law.
“Our firm finds it very rewarding to continue this fellowship with Hofstra Law in order to help encourage and promote the preeminent attorneys of tomorrow.” — Marc L. Hamroff ’83, Managing Partner, Moritt Hock & Hamroff
Brian, a resident of Massapequa Park, New York, holds a Bachelor of Science in business economics from SUNY Oneonta.
“An integral part of the history of Moritt Hock & Hamroff involves a dedication to recognizing and mentoring talented young people as they embark on a legal career,” said Marc Hamroff ’83, managing partner of Moritt Hock & Hamroff, in a press release. “Our firm finds it very rewarding to continue this Fellowship with Hofstra Law in order to help encourage and promote the preeminent attorneys of tomorrow.”
Moritt Hock & Hamroff, with offices in Manhattan and on Long Island, provides a wide range of legal services to businesses, corporations, and individuals worldwide.
The post Brian Primm 1L Awarded 2019-2020 Moritt Hock & Hamroff Business Law Honors Fellowship appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Julian Ku, the Maurice A. Deane Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Law, appeared on the News12 Long program Power & Politics on Nov. 21 to discuss impeachment and the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump with host Stone Grissom and News12 political strategist Mike Dawidziak.
The episode, titled “The Impeachment Inquiry,” first aired on Nov. 21, the day the House Intelligence Committee concluded its hearings in the impeachment inquiry.
View a video of the “The Impeachment Inquiry” episode on the News12 Long Island website.
The post Prof. Julian Ku Appears on News12’s Power & Politics to Discuss House Impeachment Inquiry Against President Donald Trump appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Motivated by his interest in learning about the practice of law in other countries, Zachary P. Cardillo 2L pursued a field placement through Hofstra Law’s Global Legal Practice Externship Program. During the summer after his first year of law school, Zachary was an intern at Ardens Solicitors in London, where he gained practical experience in the field, something essential to every law student.
About my field placement: “This past summer I had the pleasure of working for Ardens Solicitors in London as an intern. The firm predominantly deals with private and commercial conveyancing; dispute resolution; employment law; family law; immigration law; and wills, probate, and estate law.”
Real-world experience: “Under my supervisor, Scott Morris, I had the privilege to work primarily in private conveyancing and probate matters. I was able to accompany different solicitors to court and to talk with two barristers in two separate cases, and even discussed aspects of history with a member of Parliament, or MP, within the halls of Westminster. I filled out forms for the government to review, wrote correspondence between solicitors, and did my fair share of legal research into UK property law involving the Law Society Conveyancing Protocol.”
Takeaways from my experience at Ardens Solicitors and in the UK: “This internship gave me the confidence to write in a legal setting and a unique understanding of UK property law that I plan to incorporate into my education moving forward.
“I also discovered interesting differences between the UK and U.S. legal systems, such as the requirement for a solicitor to hire an outside barrister whenever the need to face a judge arises, or even the current mortgage lending issues surrounding live-work units.
“Additionally, my experience working abroad provided me the ability to observe the work-life balance in a different city and culture, as well as to experience something totally new every day. This experience was priceless.”
The post Hofstra Law Student Zachary Cardillo 2L Discusses His Internship at Ardens Solicitors appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
The article “Foreign Corruption of the Political Process Through Social Welfare Organizations” by Norman I. Silber, associate dean for research and faculty development and professor of law, was published on Oct. 4 in the Northwestern University Law Review Online (Vol. 114, 2019).
Abstract
Social welfare organizations are prohibited from channeling foreign contributions to favored political candidates. Prospects for enforcing this prohibition, however, are uncertain. Do federal election laws or tax laws provide effective tools? Are state authorities equipped to hold a nonprofit culpable as an entity, or to hold a manager or board member responsible? These questions are important to understand whether the existing rules safeguard the nonprofit community and the fairness of elections. This Essay concludes that federal tax and election rules are likely to be less effective than the authority vested with state attorneys general to monitor and hold accountable nonprofits and their officers and directors who become vehicles for foreign interference in national elections.
View the full article (PDF) on the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law Scholarly Commons website.
The post Article by Prof. Norman Silber on Foreign Interference in National Elections Published in Northwestern University Law Review appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Norman I. Silber, associate dean for research and faculty development and professor of law, gave the presentation “A Counter-Revolution by Billionaires: Disingenuous ‘Disruption’ and the Revolt against the Regulation of Philanthropy” on Nov. 22 at the 48th Annual Conference of ARNOVA, the Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Associations.
The topic of the conference, which took place in San Diego on Nov. 21-23, was “Nonprofits and Philanthropy in a Polarized World: Speaking Truth to Power and Using Power to Speak Truth.”
Professor Silber presented at a session devoted to “How Law Is Remaking Philanthropy.”
View more information about the conference on the ARNOVA website.
The post Prof. Norman Silber Presents on the ‘Revolt Against the Regulation of Philanthropy’ at 2019 ARNOVA Annual Conference appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Andrew Schepard, the Sidney and Walter Siben Distinguished Professor of Family Law and director of the Center for Children, Families and the Law, gave the presentation “Adapting Forensic Parenting Evaluations to the Needs of Parents and Children,” with Dr. Paul Meller of the Hofstra University Psychology Department, on Dec. 4 at the Tenth Judicial District third annual Matrimonial Conference.
The conference, which was designed for judges, principal law clerks, and court attorney referees serving in the Matrimonial Parts of Suffolk and Nassau counties, was held at Hofstra Law.
The post Prof. Andrew Schepard Presents on Forensic Parenting Evaluations at 10th Judicial District 3rd Annual Matrimonial Conference appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Professor Fred Klein, former chief of the Major Offense Bureau in the Nassau County District Attorney’s Office, presented to the Nassau County District and County Court judges on Dec. 5 about the new criminal discovery law in New York State.
Professor Klein delivered the presentation, titled “The Age of Enlightenment — CPL Article 245,” in the Supreme Court in Mineola, New York.
The post Prof. Fred Klein Presents to Nassau County District and County Court Judges on New Criminal Discovery Law in New York State appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Norman I. Silber, associate dean for research and faculty development and professor of law, served as an invited expert for the roundtable “Birth of a Sector: The Tax Reform Act of 1969 at Fifty.”
Organized by the Rockefeller Archive Center, the conference took place on Dec. 3-4 at the Rockefeller Archive Conference Center in Pocantico Hills, New York.
Professor Silber participated in a session in which lawyers and legal scholars reflected upon implementation of the Tax Reform Act and the continued changes since 1969.
His fellow discussants were Nishka Chandrasoma, vice president, secretary, and general counsel at the Ford Foundation; Paul Feinberg, senior counsel at the Jewish Community Federation of Cleveland and former assistant general counsel at the Ford Foundation; Sheila Avrin McLean, former associate general counsel and board appointed officer, former South Africa program officer, and former assistant general counsel at the Ford Foundation; and Douglas Varley, a member at Caplin & Drysdale and an adjunct professor, Georgetown University Law Center. The moderator was James Ferris, director of the Center on Philanthropy and Public Policy and Emery Evans Olson Professor of Non-Profit Entrepreneurship and Public Policy at the University of Southern California.
About the Conference
The Tax Reform Act of 1969 represents a signal moment in the birth and development of the “Third Sector.” While historians debate the origin story, to many scholars and practitioners alike, 1969 was the beginning of a robust regulatory framework with ramifications for today’s philanthropic work. During the decade-long implementation of the new legislation, scholars, foundation professionals, and policymakers increasingly began to articulate the necessity of a third, or nonprofit, sector as a balancing element to the public and for-profit sectors — indeed as a balancing force necessary for democracy. Fifty years later, the regulatory framework established by the Act is often taken for granted. The Act and its impact have been studied by historians, legal scholars, and policy analysts, but many more rich veins for research remain untapped. This convening aims to bring together a core group of individuals who have been committed to understanding the Act and its legacy, the transformative effect it has had on the third sector, and the relationship of the sector to private wealth, American public life, and the common good. The convening’s invitees span the fields of law, policy, history, and foundation practice, and have never been brought together before.
At the same time, the Archive Center itself plays a role in Third Sector transparency and accountability. As the repository of the archival records of some three dozen foundations and civil society organizations, the RAC is uniquely positioned to foster scholarship and deep engagement with historical episodes that may provide lessons for the present.
This conference brings together four expert groups: lawyers, scholars, policy/sector professionals, and program officers. The conversation possible among these groups is distinctive in that it mobilizes expertise and in many cases lived experience dealing with legal structures, ideological frameworks, and philanthropic practice. We anticipate that the primary outcome of this meeting will be a refreshed research agenda that not only adds to historical understanding but also takes into account the current and forecasted challenges the sector must face. We intend to self-publish a proceedings that we hope will be widely read throughout the sector and fittingly mark the fiftieth anniversary of the still-relevant Act.
The post Prof. Norman Silber Serves as Invited Expert for Roundtable Marking 50th Anniversary of Tax Reform Act of 1969 appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Analysis
Exxon Win Casts Doubt On Climate Securities Fraud Suits
By Keith Goldberg
Law360
Dec. 10, 2019
Excerpt:
A New York state judge said Tuesday that state Attorney General Letitia James’ office failed to support its blockbuster allegations that Exxon made material misstatements about how it accounted for climate-related risks and that its climate disclosures had a material impact on investors. That’s the threshold for sustaining claims under the Martin Act, the powerful New York securities law that doesn’t require the government to prove fraudulent intent.
The judge’s conclusion that the state didn’t clear even that relatively low bar vindicates Exxon’s decision to fight the highly publicized claims at trial, said Ronald Colombo, a securities law professor at Hofstra University’s Maurice A. Deane School of Law. And it could embolden companies that face similar accusations to take their chances in court, he said.
“If I wanted to cite this case going forward … it would be for the proposition that speculative statements that are expressed as such with the proper cautionary language are unlikely to be deemed material,” Colombo said. “Investors know when you’re taking a best guess.”
Read the full article on the Law360 website.
The post Prof. Ronald Colombo Quoted on Ruling by NYS Judge in Landmark Exxon Climate-Change Case in Law360 Story appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Professor Brenner Fissell filed an amicus brief in the Bowe Bergdahl case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces addressing the issue of whether the President can legally commit “unlawful command influence.”
The post Prof. Brenner Fissell Files Amicus Brief in the Bowe Bergdahl Case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Professor Eric M. Freedman, the Siggi B. Wilzig Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Rights, gave the presentation “The Substance of Montgomery Retroactivity: The Definition of States’ Supremacy Clause Obligation to Enforce Newly-Recognized Federal rights in Their Post-Conviction Proceedings and Why it Matters,” on Jan. 2 at the 2020 AALS Annual Meeting.
Professor Freedman presented on the panel “New Frontiers in State Post-Conviction Litigation.” View the full panel description on the AALS website and the abstract included below.
Abstract
In Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S.Ct. 718 (2016), the Supreme Court made a decision of far-reaching importance to the criminal justice system: the Supremacy Clause requires states adjudicating post-conviction attacks to give full retroactive effect to “substantive” new rules of federal constitutional law.
The significance of this holding has so far been under-appreciated because of the assumption that “substantive” has the same narrow meaning in the context of the state’s obligations under the Supremacy Clause as it does under Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989), which sets forth prudential limitations on the claims that the federal courts will entertain when adjudicating federal habeas corpus attacks on state criminal convictions.
But, this article argues, the two contexts are not the same and the assumption is unwarranted. To be sure, rules that are “substantive” under Teague are also substantive under Montgomery. But because Montgomery is based on the Supremacy Clause the class of “substantive” federal rules for Montgomery purposes is far broader that it is for Teague purposes.
“Substantive” rules under Montgomery, I propose, include all those whose policy underpinnings extend beyond enhancing the factual accuracy of particular decisions. Examples include rules whose aims are to discountenance government misconduct (e.g., barring evidence derived from coerced confessions or unreasonable searches) and ones designed to achieve full community participation in the judicial process (e.g., adding new groups to the ones that may not constitutionally be excluded from jury service, and expanding the categories of juror bias that a defendant must be permitted to litigate).
Adopting the proposed definition will have structural benefits to the system of criminal justice adjudication. The Montgomery decision will necessarily have the effect of increasing the number of state post-conviction decisions. The broader the definition of “substantive” the more pronounced the effect. The more pronounced the effect the better off the criminal justice system will be, for two reasons. First, state post-conviction decisions will be some extent be able to fill the gap in the normal creation of new rules by lower federal courts that has resulted from the restrictive ruling in Teague. Second, the greater the salience of post-conviction decisions, the greater the pressure on the states to improve the quality of their post-conviction systems.
In the interests of making modest but real improvements in the quality of our criminal law, lawyers, legislators, academics, judges, and all individuals concerned about justice should take advantage of every opportunity to secure adoption of the proposal of this article.
The post Prof. Eric Freedman Presents at the 2020 AALS Annual Meeting appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Judge Fern Fisher, Special Assistant for Social Justice Initiatives to the Dean of the Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University, joined Dr. Ira Nash on WHRU for his podcast, Well Said, to discuss a particularly strong, but often underappreciated influence on health – the quality of housing.
How we live and where we live have a profound influence on our health. In fact, most experts believe that lifestyle choices like diet, physical activity, and smoking, along with social circumstances like poverty and poor educational opportunities, are more powerful predictors of health and wellbeing than genetics or access to good health care.
Listen to the full podcast on the Zucker School of Medicine website.
The post Judge Fern Fisher Gives a Podcast Talk on How Housing Affects Health appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
Professor Ronald J. Colombo will present as part of a panel focused on faith-based dispute resolution processes available in the New York metropolitan area. The presentation will take place on February 4, 2020 at the New York County Lawyers Association.
Read more about this event or register on the NYCLA website.
The post Prof. Ronald Colombo to Present on Faith-Based Dispute Resolution at the New York County Lawyers Association appeared first on Hofstra Law News.
