Where Are the 2007–08 Financial Crisis Prosecutions? A Response to Judge Rakoff
Joshua J. Smith
Judge Rakoff is correct to attribute a portion of the lack of prosecutions to the Justice Department’s shift in focus to counterterrorism and pursing cases that would yield “easier” convictions. However, his suggestions that an embarrassment about the government’s role in the financial crisis or a focus on corporate reform contributed to the lack of prosecutions is misplaced. This Commentary will proceed in four parts, each evaluating the merits of Judge Rakoff’s identified factors contributing to the lack of executive prosecutions related to the mortgage fraud scandal. View PDF
Their Blood, Their Sweat, Whose Problem?: Insurance Coverage Implications of the NFL Concussion Litigation
This Commentary explores the insurance implications of the ongoing NFL concussion litigation. Part I describes the procedural history of the concussion lawsuits, the settlement reached between the NFL and over 4500 former players, and obstacles that stand in the way for players that chose to opt-out of the settlement class and reserve the right to pursue individual claims against the NFL. Part II examines the pending coverage litigation regarding insurers’ obligations to defend and/or indemnify the NFL for settlement expenses and the ongoing underlying concussion claims. Specifically, it highlights how dispositive choice of law determinations will be to the outcome of the litigation, as jurisdictions apply competing theories of policy interpretation, including when coverage is triggered, the duty to defend, and other policy exclusions. View PDF
New Jersey Domestic Violence Law: The Broken “Need Analysis”
Jason Scott Kanterman & Jesse Kyle Posey
New Jersey courts have provided a structure for deciding when Final Restraining Orders (“FROs”) should be entered. Part of this instruction, and often the most outcome-determinative portion, has been dubbed the need analysis. While the New Jersey Supreme Court in J.D. v. M.D.F. attempted to provide guidance on how to conduct the need analysis, it appears that more clarity is needed as to what is expected of trial courts in conducting their analyses. This Article seeks to highlight a major deficiency in the need analysis inquiry—specifically, a vague instruction by the New Jersey Supreme Court which has lead to an inconsistent application of the law by trial courts—in hopes of calling attention to an area of law which is in desperate need for clarity or revision. View PDF
Volume 68, Issues 4 and 5 are on their way!
The Law Review will be hosting the 28th Annual State Constitutional Law Lecture at Rutgers Law School, Camden, on Wednesday, Feb. 22, 2017, at 4:00 PM. Please follow the link below for more details. http://www.rutgerslawreview.com/2179-17973-pcard-lowrez-1/
Attention Camden Alumni—The Camden campus is looking to gather updated contact information from Alumni. Update Your Contact Information! Visit http://www.rutgersuniversitylaw review.com/. Under the “About” tab, select “Alumni.” Click “Alumni Contact Information Update.” From there, you can update your contact and work information with us to help stay better connected to the Law Review!
Additionally, If you are still in contact with Rutgers Law Journal alumni, please have them contact our Business Editor at firstname.lastname@example.org so we can add them to our alumni database.