Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 6(e) and 72(a): how poor draftsmanship makes for bad law

Article Abstract:

The poor wording of Federal Rules of Procedure 6(e) and 72(a) have led to contradictory and illogical interpretation in the courts. Rule 6(e) deals with the calculation of time regarding filing deadlines, and as such profoundly influences the litigation process. However, its wording leaves litigators and court officials confused and uncertain about its interpretation. Likewise, Rule 72(a) deals with the limitation of actions one may take in response to a magistrate's nondispositive order. Ambiguous wording has resulted in contradictory interpretations by US Courts of Appeal.

Author: Plog, Leonard H., II
Publisher: South Texas Law Review Inc.
Publication Name: South Texas Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 1052-343X
Year: 1993
Interpretation and construction, Law, Time (Law)

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome: occupational disease or work-related accident?

Article Abstract:

Those who suffer from multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) syndrome may have better luck with a workers' compensation than an occupational disease cause of action at obtaining a remedy. Workers' compensation claims try to make the disease fit the state's statutory definition of an industrial accidents. The success of such claims with victims of cumulative trama disorders bodes well for their chances of obtaining disability compensation for MCS sufferers.

Author: Corbett, Kelly
Publisher: Boston College Law School
Publication Name: Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0190-7034
Year: 1997
United States, Remedies, Chemical sensitivity, Multiple, Multiple chemical sensitivity

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


The cold shoulder of occupational disease recovery: Ganske v. Spahn & Rose Lumber Co

Article Abstract:

The author criticizes the 1998 decision of the Iowa Supreme Court in Ganske v. Spahn & Rose Lumber Co. where the court denied a retired worker remedies under the worker compensation and occupational disease statutes because the asbestos-related cancer from which he suffered was diagnosed after the statute of limitations had run. The author advocates application of the discovery doctrine to avoid injustice in cases of latent diseases.

Author: Sander, Kevin R.
Publisher: University of Iowa Journal of Corporation Law
Publication Name: The Journal of Corporation Law
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0360-795X
Year: 2000
Iowa

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Laws, regulations and rules, Limitation of actions, Statute of limitations, Occupational diseases, Workers' compensation
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade: world trade from a market perspective. Linkages between ethics and international economic law
  • Abstracts: Speaking of a moot suit: procedure lesson accompanies rejection of English-only law case. Spuds spur veto fight: plaintiffs charge Line Item Veto Act violates separation of powers
  • Abstracts: Freedom of contract and labor law reform: opening up the possibilities for value-added unionism. The politics of labor regulation in North America: a reconsideration of labor law enforcement in Mexico
  • Abstracts: The Packers & Stockyards Act of 1921 applied to the hog industry of 1995. The impendiing merger of the inevitable disclosure doctrine and negative trade secrets: is trade secrets law headed in the right direction?
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.