Print Issue Volume 95 - No. 5

Note, The Problem with Waste: Delaware’s Lenient Treatment of Waste Claims at the Demand Stage of Derivative Litigation

The Note addresses the Delaware courts’ treatment of waste claims at the demand stage of derivative litigation. Recent Delaware opinions indicate that waste is part of the fiduciary duty of good faith. This means that directors are not protected from claims of waste by section 102(b)(7) exculpation clauses in their corporations’ certificates of incorporation. Additionally, […]

Read More :: View PDF

Note, Diversity Jurisdiction and Injunctive Relief: Using “Moving-Party Approach” to Value the Amount in Controversy

A necessary requirement for federal diversity jurisdiction is that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. Injunctions, however, are not a sum certain, and courts often struggle to value this intangible form of relief for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. Further compounding this problem is the fact that injunctions often differentially impact the litigants—leaving courts uncertain as […]

Read More :: View PDF

De Novo

  • What the Tax Bill Means for Students

    WHAT THE “TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT” MEANS FOR STUDENTS: DO WE WANT INCENTIVES OR SIMPLIFICATION? By: Melanie Pulles Benson, Volume 102 Staff Member The new House tax reform bill, the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” (“Act”), significantly departs from the current tax code.[1] The Act alters the tax brackets, […]

  • Losing Bigly

    LOSING BIGLY: HOW THE ACLU’S COMPLAINT FORCED THE U.S. GOVERNMENT TO RELEASE ROSA MARIA By: David Racine, Volume 102 Staff Member On October 25, 2017, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) detained Rosa Maria Hernandez, a ten-year-old child with cerebral palsy who was recovering from an emergency surgery she endured […]

  • Silent and Ambiguous

    SILENT AND AMBIGUOUS: THE SUPREME COURT DODGES CHEVRON AND LENITY IN ESQUIVEL-QUINTANA V. SESSIONS By: David Hahn, Volume 102 Staff Member[1] Twenty-year-old Juan Esquivel-Quintana—a lawful permanent resident from Mexico—had consensual sex with his sixteen-year-old girlfriend.[2] This violated California’s statutory rape statute,[3] and he pled no contest in state court.[4] The […]


© 2011-2016 Minnesota Law Review. All Rights Reserved.