Yes, I know, I know, I just posted about this yesterday. But there’s another one! This time we’ve got SASC, LLC v. School Supply Connection, Inc. from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The defendant in SASC submitted the following legal argument and citation: “Interpretation of the contract provisions
Blog Authors
Latest from Ziff Blog
When Bluebooking Matters
By David Ziff
For most lawyers, close is good enough for citation rules. As I’ve explained elsewhere, The Bluebook is mostly a guide for law review editors, which means it has way more rules and details than normal lawyers need for a usual court filing.
But that doesn’t mean lawyers can just ignore The Bluebook. Sometimes the…
The City Attorney’s Blanket “Affidavit of Prejudice” Policy Against Judge Vaddadi
By David Ziff
On March 1, the Seattle City Attorney’s Office announced that it would be filing an affidavit of prejudice against Judge Pooja Vaddadi “in all criminal cases going forward.” Under Washington Criminal Rules for Courts of Limited Jurisdiction, an affidavit of prejudice means that Judge Vaddadi is immediately disqualified from every case in which the…
Who Is Citing Slavery?
By David Ziff
The most-recent version of The Bluebook includes a new rule, Rule 10.7.1(d). Generally, Rule 10.7.1 deals with when and how to cite an opinion’s prior and subsequent history, like if an opinion affirms a previous opinion or is later reversed by a subsequent opinion. Stuff like that.
Rule 10.7.1(d) addresses something different. It provides…
The Supreme Court at UW Law: Gerlach v. The Cove Apartments (Preview Part 3)
By David Ziff
I’m publishing this last one just under the wire. On Thursday of this week the Washington Supreme Court will be visiting the UW School of Law to hear arguments on three cases. I’ve already previewed two of those cases: State v. Escalante and Lee v. Evergreen Hospital.
This post discusses Gerlach v. The Cove…
The Supreme Court at UW Law: Lee v. Evergreen Hospital (Preview Part 2)
By David Ziff
Here we go again. In advance of the Washington Supreme Court’s visit to the UW School of Law on February 20, I’m previewing the three cases the Court will hear that day. If you missed my first preview—a discussion of how Miranda applies at the border, which the Court will tackle in State…
The Supreme Court at UW Law: State v. Escalante (Preview Part 1)
By David Ziff
On Thursday, February 20, the Washington Supreme Court will hear oral arguments at the University of Washington School of Law. Exciting times! In advance of the arguments, I thought folks might enjoy a bit of an argument preview. So that’s what I’m doing. Of course, if you want to read through all the briefing yourself,…
The President’s Statutory Power to Build the Wall
By David Ziff
In the next few weeks, statutory interpretation is going to be the talk of the town. President Trump’s emergency declaration, though it has all the trappings of a constitutional crisis and king-like assertions of power, is really nothing more than a nice little question about the meaning of statutes. Congress passed a statute that allows…
The Problem of Authority
By David Ziff
Review of Amy J. Griffin, Dethroning the Hierarchy of Authority, 97 Or. L. Rev. _______ (forthcoming)
Legal analysis differs from other forms of analysis in (at least) one important respect: We have to deal with authority. The wall between “is” and “ought” can be insurmountable when you’re standing in front of a district court…
An Update on Intra-Divisional Stare Decisis in Washington
By David Ziff
Back in February, the Supreme Court of Washington decided In re Arnold, which held that a Division of the Court of Appeals should not follow the decisions of the other Divisions as a matter of horizontal stare decisis. As I observed at the time, the Supreme Court’s distinction between inter-Division conflicts and intra-Division conflicts…