Monday, August 8, 2011

Recent Law Review Articles -- July 2011

Levy, Richard E. and Robert L. Glicksman. Agency-specific precedents. 89 Tex. L. Rev. 499-581 (2011).

Meazell, Emily Hammond. Super deference, the science obsession, and judicial review as translation of agency science. 109 Mich. L. Rev. 733-784 (2011).

Leary, David and Miguel Esteban. Recent developments in offshore renewable energy in the Asia-Pacific region. 42 Ocean Dev. & Int’l L. 94-119 (2011).

Bourland, Kristin M. Advocating change within the ADA: the struggle to recognize emotional-support animals as service animals. 48 U. Louisville L. Rev. 197-220 (2009).

Wilde, Kathleen. Animal law in Nevada: all bark and no bite. 11 Nev. L.J. 254-281 (2010).

Sorensen, Ross J. Illinois’s first attempt at sustainable building is green for all the wrong reasons. 35 S. Ill. U. L.J. 163-186 (2010).

Bartenstein, Kristin. The “Arctic exception” in the Law of the Sea Convention: a contribution to safer navigation in the Northwest Passage? 42 Ocean Dev. & Int’l L. 22-52 (2011).

Henriksen, Tore and Geir Ulfstein. Maritime delimitation in the Arctic: the Barents Sea Treaty. 42 Ocean Dev. & Int’l L. 1-21 (2011).

Dougan, Lisa. Injured plaintiffs in asbestos actions are enjoined from suing insurer of asbestos manufacturer for alleged wrongdoings of insurer based on language of Bankruptcy Court’s reorganization orders: ... (Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Bailey, 129 S. Ct. 2195, 2009.) 12 Duq. Bus. L.J. 273-289 (2010).

Newton, James. Searching for a “right to payment”: defining the scope of Bankruptcy Code § 101(5)(B) under RCRA and other statutes not providing express “rights to payment.” 19 Penn St. Envtl. L. Rev. 55-108 (2011).

Kim, Tak Jong. Expanding the arsenal against biopiracy: application of the concession agreement framework to prevent misappropriation of biodiversity. 14 SMU Sci. & Tech. L. Rev. 69-126 (2010).

Blumm, Michael C. Present at the creation: the 1910 Big Burn and the formative days of the U.S. Forest Service. (Reviewing Timothy Egan, The Big Burn: Teddy Roosevelt & the Fire That Saved America.) 37 Ecology L.Q. 1217-1224 (2010).

Wagner, Wendy, Katherine Barnes and Lisa Peters. Rulemaking in the shade: an empirical study of EPA’s air toxic emission standards. 63 Admin. L. Rev. 99-158 (2011).

Heinen, Jason J. How the Constitution draws a “line in the sand” for the extent of federal control over non-navigable waterways. 5 Liberty U. L. Rev. 115-150 (2010).

Morrison, Gregory H. A nexus of confusion: why the agencies responsible for Clean Water Act enforcement should promulgate a new set of rules governing the Act’s jurisdiction. 42 McGeorge L. Rev. 397-418 (2011).

Climate Change and the Future of Energy. Articles by James M. Van Nostrand, Anne Marie Hirschberger, William T. Reisinger, Mark Squillace, Kevin L. Doran, Trevor D. Stiles, David Grinlinton and LeRoy Paddock. 41 U. Tol. L. Rev. 853-973 (2010).

Nagan, Winston P. and Judit K. Otvos. Legal theory and the anthropocene challenge: the implications of law, science, and policy for weapons of mass destruction and climate change. The expanding and constraining boundaries of legal space and time and the challenge of the anthropocene. 12 J.L. & Soc. Challenges 150-219 (2010).

Squillace, Mark. Climate change and institutional competence. 41 U. Tol. L. Rev. 889-908 (2010).

Cicale, Nicholas J. The clean development mechanism: renewable energy infrastructure for China and an empty promise for Africa. 26 Conn. J. Int’l L. 253-280 (2010).

Botchway, Francis N. Mergers and acquisitions in resource industry: implications for Africa. 26 Conn. J. Int’l L. 51-88 (2010).

Perry, Ronen. Economic loss, punitive damages, and the Exxon Valdez litigation. 45 Ga. L. Rev. 409-487 (2011).

Zane, Steven Nathaniel. Leveling the playing field: the international legality of carbon tariffs in the EU. 34 B.C. Int’l & Comp. L. Rev. 199-225 (2011).

Kelly, Ryan P. The use of population genetics in Endangered Species Act listing decisions. 37 Ecology L.Q. 1107-1158 (2010).

Kelly, Ryan P. Spinless wonders: how listing marine invertebrates and their larvae challenges the U.S. Endangered Species Act. 19 Penn St. Envtl. L. Rev. 1-53 (2011).

Ray, Allan. Protecting “wood” for the Woodland Caribou: critical habitat considerations. 19 Penn St. Envtl. L. Rev. 151-175 (2011).

Outka, Uma. Siting renewable energy: land use and regulatory context. 37 Ecology L.Q. 1041-1105 (2010).

Tomasovic, Brian S. and Stephen V. Arbogast. Recent developments in Texas, United States, and international energy law. 6 Tex. J. Oil Gas & Energy L. 163-202 (2010-2011).

Stiles, Trevor D. Regulatory barriers to clean energy. 41 U. Tol. L. Rev. 923-941 (2010).

Kumabe, Kerry. The public’s right of participation: attaining environmental justice on Hawai’i through deliberative decisionmaking. 17 Asian Am. L.J. 181-217 (2010).

Henriksen, Tore and Alf Håkon Hoel. Determining allocation: from paper to practice in the distribution of fishing rights between countries. 42 Ocean Dev. & Int’l L. 66-93 (2011).

Rey Aneiros, Adela. Spain, the European Union, and Canada: a new phase in the unstable balance in the Northwest Atlantic fisheries. 42 Ocean Dev. & Int’l L. 155-172 (2011).

Hudson, Blake. Climate change, forests, and federalism: seeing the treaty for the trees. [Includes photograph.] 82 U. Colo. L. Rev. 363-429 (2011).

Daniel, David. Seeds of hope: how new genetic technologies may increase value to farmers, seed companies, and the developing world. 36 Rutgers Computer & Tech. L.J. 250-288 (2010).

Garrison, Travis L. The EPA’s greenhouse gas regulation tailoring rule: administrative necessity avoiding or pursuing absurd results? 56 Loy. L. Rev. 685-731 (2010).

Perry, Ronen. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill and the limits of civil liability. 86 Wash. L. Rev. 1-68 (2011).

Paschall, Gabrielle. Protecting our past: the need for uniform regulation to protect archaeological resources. 27 T.M. Cooley L. Rev. 353-398 (2010).

Pifer, Ross H. Drake meets Marcellus: a review of Pennsylvania case law upon the sesquicentennial of the United States oil and gas industry. 6 Tex. J. Oil Gas & Energy L. 47-73 (2010-2011).

Harris, Michael Ray. Environmental deliberative democracy and the search for administrative legitimacy: a legal positivism approach. 44 U. Mich. J.L. Reform 343-382 (2011).

Bedell, Megan E. Inherently beneficial or particularly well suited? Reconsidering the treatment of affordable housing in use variance applications. (Homes of Hope, Inc. v. Eastampton Township Land Use Planning Board, 976 A.2d 1128, 2009.) 41 Seton Hall L. Rev. 319-359 (2011).

Bzdok, Christopher M. and Michael C. Grant. Edith Kyser, Plaintiff-Appelee v. Kasson Township, a Michigan General Law Township, Defendant-Appellant. 27 T.M. Cooley L. Rev. 419-476 (2010).

Hoelle, John C. Re-evaluating tribal customs of land use rights. 82 U. Colo. L. Rev. 551-594 (2011).

Vickers, Justin. Res juducata claim preclusion of properly filed citizen suits. 104 Nw. U. L. Rev. 1623-1652 (2010).

Woodward, Amber R. The scope of “plaintiff’s harm” in environmental preliminary injunctions. 88 Wash. U. L. Rev. 507-533 (2010).

Bowman, Diana M. and George Gilligan. The private dimension in the regulation of nanotechnologies: developments in the industrial chemicals sector. 28 UCLA J. Envtl. L. & Pol’y 77-121 (2010).

Dana, David. When less liability may mean more precaution: the case of nanotechnology. 28 UCLA J. Envtl. L. & Pol’y 153-199 (2010).

Goldstein, Bernard D., M.D. The scientific basis for the regulation of nanoparticles: challenging Paracelsus and Paré. 28 UCLA J. Envtl. L. & Pol’y 7-28 (2010).

Kysar, Douglas A. Ecologic: nanotechnology, environmental assurance bonding, and symmetric humility. 28 UCLA J. Envtl. L. & Pol’y 201-249 (2010).

Malloy, Timothy F. Disrupting conventional policy: the three faces of nanotechnology. 28 UCLA J. Envtl. L. & Pol’y 1-6 (2010).

Marchant, Gary E., Douglas J. Sylvester and Kenneth W. Abbott. A new soft law approach to nanotechnology oversight: a voluntary product certification scheme. 28 UCLA J. Envtl. L. & Pol’y 123-152 (2010).

Paddock, LeRoy. An integrated approach to nanotechnology governance. 28 UCLA J. Envtl. L. & Pol’y 251-290 (2010).

Perez, Oren. Precautionary governance and the limits of scientific knowledge: a democratic framework for regulating nanotechnology. 28 UCLA J. Envtl. L. & Pol’y 29-76 (2010).

Symposium on Nanotech Regulatory Policy. Articles by Timothy F. Malloy, Bernard D. Goldstein, M.D., Oren Perez, Diana M. Bowman, George Gilligan, Gary E. Marchant, Douglas J. Sylvester, Kenneth W. Abbott, David Dana, Douglas A. Kysar and LeRoy Paddock. 28 UCLA J. Envtl. L. & Pol’y 1-290 (2010).

Barnum, Cassandra. A single penny, an inch of land, or an ounce of sovereignty: the problem of tribal sovereignty and water quality regulation under the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act. 37 Ecology L.Q. 1159-1216 (2010).

Felsenthal, Adam B. Is Iraq the next Nigeria?: revenue sharing and the natural resource curse. 27 Ariz. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 787-833 (2010).

Hearn, Michael F. One person’s waste is another person’s liability: closing the liability loophole in RCRA’s citizen enforcement action. 42 McGeorge L. Rev. 467-497 (2011).

Alexander, Alan J. The Texas wind estate: wind as a natural resource and a severable property interest. 44 U. Mich. J.L. Reform 429-465 (2011).

Glover, Andrew. The pit and the pendulum: how far can RLUIPA go in protecting the Amish? 19 Penn St. Envtl. L. Rev. 109-130 (2011).

Stout, Kelli. Tent cities and RLUIPA: how a new religious-land-use issue aggravates RLUIPA. 41 Seton Hall L. Rev. 465-499 (2011).

Van Nostrand, James M. and Anne Marie Hirschberger. Implications of a federal renewable portfolio standard: will it supplement or supplant existing state initiatives? 41 U. Tol. L. Rev. 853-875 (2010).

Danney, Jeremy H. Sacking CEQA: how NFL stadium developers may have tackled the California Environmental Quality Act. 19 Penn St. Envtl. L. Rev. 131-150 (2011).

Wynne, Roger D. The path out of Washington’s takings quagmire: the case for adopting the federal takings analysis. 86 Wash. L. Rev. 125-184 (2011).

Mann, Roberta F. Like water for energy: the water-energy nexus through the lens of tax policy. 82 U. Colo. L. Rev. 505-549 (2011).

Gifford, Donald G. Climate change and the public law model of torts: reinvigorating judicial restraint doctrines. 62 S.C. L. Rev. 201-259 (2010).

Goldsby, Aubri. The McCarran Amendment and groundwater: why Washington State should require inclusion of groundwater in general stream adjudications involving federal reserved water rights. 86 Wash. L. Rev. 185-216 (2011).

Toll, Michael. Reimagining western water law: time-limited water right permits based on a comprehensive beneficial use doctrine. 82 U. Colo. L. Rev. 595-637 (2011).

Turner, Derek L. Pagosa Area Water & Sanitation District v. Trout Unlimited and an anti-speculation doctrine for a new era of water supply planning. 82 U. Colo. L. Rev. 639-677 (2011).

Owen, Dave. Urbanization, water quality, and the regulated landscape. 82 U. Colo. L. Rev. 431-504 (2011).

Sundareshan, Priyanka. Using the transfer of water rights as a climate change adaptation strategy: comparing the United States and Australia. 27 Ariz. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 911-944 (2010).

No comments: