My Life in Crime: An Intellectual History of the Juvenile Court
Part I examines changes associated with the Supreme Court’s requirement that juvenile courts provide delinquents some procedural safeguards. Part II examines the Get Tough Era and states’ emphases on youths’ adult-like culpability and adoption of punitive policies. Part III reviews the Supreme Court’s recent jurisprudence of youth, reaffirmation that children are different, and limits on harsh punishment for youths. It concludes with a reflection on the limits of juvenile justice reform to improve the life chances of young people.
Bad Medicine: Parents, the State, and the Charge of ‘Medical Child Abuse’
Doctors and hospitals have begun to level a new charge — “medical child abuse” (MCA) — against parents who, they say, get unnecessary medical treatment for their kids. The fact that this treatment has been ordered by other doctors does not protect parents from these accusations.
Here’s how Louisiana sentencing laws are changing under criminal justice reform
Louisiana lawmakers approved a criminal justice system overhaul — one that advocates are calling historic — during the 2017 regular legislative session. We’ve broken down the package into three parts. This installment, the second, is about changes to sentencing laws.
N.C. law: Woman can’t back out of sex once underway
Aaliyah Palmer was at a party when a man pulled her into a bathroom for sex. She was willing. But, she told Fayetteville police, when the sex turned violent, she told the man to stop. He didn’t listen
How Do You Prove Damages When Executives Breach A Non-Solicit Provision?
In 2011, a group of executives left Horizon Health Corporation for a competitor, Acadia, but they didn’t leave everything behind. Horizon’s president took a “massive, massive amount” of Horizon documents with him on an external hard drive. And despite provisions in their contracts prohibiting them from soliciting Horizon’s employees, the executives recruited a key member of Horizon’s sales team, John Piechocki, who copied lists of sales leads and added them to his new company’s “master contact list.”
Texas Supreme Court Will Decide Whether Texas Recognizes A Tortious Interference With Inheritance Claim
In Anderson v. Archer, the trial court’s judgment awarded the plaintiffs $2.5 million in damages based on a tortious interference with inheritance claim. No. 03-13-00790-CV, 2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 2165 (Tex. App.—Austin March 2, 2016, pet. granted). The defendants appealed and argued that Texas law does not recognize such a claim.
The ALI Adviser is intended to inform readers about the legal topics and issues examined in many of ALI’s current projects; posts do not necessarily represent the position of the Institute taken in those projects. Posts on The ALI Adviser are written by ALI project participants, ALI members, and outside sources. Completed work is available to purchase online.