University of Pittsburgh

Archived Faculty News

January 19, 2007 - 2:36pm
Professor Douglas Branson, the W. Edward Sell Chair in Business Law, is the subject of an extensive interview today in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on the subject of his most recent book,  No Seat at the Table: How Corporate Governance and Law Keep Women Out of the Boardroom. Link: 
January 16, 2007 - 2:39pm
Professor John Burkoff is quoted in this morning's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in connection with the ethical implications of the City Solicitor for the City of Pittsburgh defending the City against a lawsuit brought by police Commander police Catherine McNeilly, who claims that she was demoted after publicizing alleged inteference in police business by the former operations director of the city. Link:
January 16, 2007 - 2:38pm
Dean Mary Crossley is among the deans of American law schools who signed a letter released yesterday that responds to the recent remarks of Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Charles "Cully" Stimson concerning the representation of suspected terrorist detainees.  The letter begins as follows:
We, the undersigned law deans, are appalled by the January 11, 2007 statement of Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Charles "Cully" Stimson, criticizing law firms for their pro bono representation of suspected terrorist detainees and encouraging corporate executives to force these law firms to choose between their pro bono and paying clients.
January 16, 2007 - 2:37pm
The Current Chair of the Women in Legal Education Section of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS), Professor Pat Chew, and Professor Deborah Brake, were panelists for a program at the AALS annual meeting on the topic of "Subtle Sexism in our Everyday Lives."  For the January 7th program, Professor Brake spoke about the difficulties faced by women in perceiving and challenging subtle sexism and the ways in which discrimination law makes both of these tasks more difficult. Professor Chew discussed the use of subtlely sexist language by judges, attorneys, students and faculty, in particular the use of male-gendered pronouns and nouns. Articles based on their presentations will be published in a future issue of the Columbia Journal of Gender and the Law. Associate Professor Elena Baylis was a panelist on a program presented by the Section on Law and Interpretation, entitled "The Past and Future of Legal Pluralism." Link:
January 11, 2007 - 2:40pm
Professor Anthony Infanti presented Homo Sacer, Homosexual: Some Thoughts on Waging Tax Guerrilla Warfare, 2 Unbound: Harv. J. of the Legal Left 27 (2006), at the University of Toronto on Wednesday, January 10, as part of the James Hausman Tax Law and Policy Workshop Series and the Diversity Workshop Series. Link:
January 10, 2007 - 2:41pm
Professor Arthur D. Hellman, the Sally Ann Semenko Endowed Chair at Pitt Law, was quoted in a recent Washington Post article on the political struggle to control judicial appointments for the important Fourth Circuit of the Federal Court of Appeals. Professor Hellman noted that several Clinton appointments had been "fairly conservative," making it difficult to predict the court's future direction.
January 8, 2007 - 2:41pm
Professor Douglas Branson, the W. Edward Sell Chair in Business Law at Pitt, was quoted in last Saturday's Bits & Bytes column in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
December 21, 2006 - 2:42pm
Professor Douglas Branson, the W. Edward Sell Chair in Business Law at Pitt, was quoted in last Sunday's New York Times article on women in the executive suite:
CORPORATE boards remain, for the most part, clubby and male-dominated worlds where members have attended many of the same schools, dress the same and represent a single social class, says Douglas M. Branson, a professor of corporate governance at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
December 14, 2006 - 2:56pm
Professor John Burkoff is publishing an article on resolving the ethical dilemmas posed for criminal defense counsel when their clients decide to play "let's make a deal," that is, cooperate with the government, and testify against their former co-defendants. "Flipper Ethics," will be appearing in The Champion 30 (January-February 2007), the journal of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL).
December 14, 2006 - 2:55pm
Professor Arthur D. Hellman, the Sally Ann Semenko Endowed Chair at Pitt Law, was interviewed for the December 12 issue of Bankruptcy Court Decisions Weekly News & Comment (BNA) regarding developments in federal legislation that would have appointed an Inspector General for the federal courts.  From the interview:
N&C: You testified in favor of the bill, and now you're happy it's dead? AH: I thought there were justifiable concerns. Nevertheless, I also think the judiciary's latest recommendations and the Breyer Committee Report went a long way toward doing what needed to be done. I also think that those actions would not have come about without some pressure from Congress. I don't think it's a coincidence that you see the judiciary being more aggressive and more proactive after a period of congressional inquiry. N&C: What actions did the Judicial Conference take? AH: In response to instances when judges failed to disqualify themselves despite financial conflicts, the conference adopted a policy that mandates the use of conflict-checking computer software. In response to concerns about the expense-paid attendance of judges at education programs, the conference now requires greater disclosure and public posting of the sponsorship information. The Judicial Conference also has the Breyer Report in their hands. That committee studied the effectiveness of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, which laid out the system for filing and resolving complaints of judicial misconduct or disability. What's interesting to me is that there were strong parallels between the Breyer Report and the Inspector General bill. The report calls for a greater central role in the handling of complaints of judicial misconduct. The theory of the 1980 law was that judicial misconduct complaints would be handled almost entirely at the Circuit level. The underlying premise behind the Sensenbrenner bill was that that had to be changed a little bit - the focus of misconduct investigations would still be in the Circuits, but you would have additional authority at the national level to look into these matters. The Breyer Report makes the same recommendation but stops short of recommending that a new office be developed.

Revised 09/28/2011 | Copyright 2011 | Site by UMC