Introductory remarks by the Honorable Justice Stewart G. Pollock at Seton Hall University School of Law

This address is based upon a presentation given at Seton Hall University School of Law's Seventh Annual Health Law Symposium on February 12, 1999.     

Canadian court upholds arbitration clause in patent licence dispute

A Canadian court has held that a dispute relating to warrantiesin a patent licence agreement regarding inventorship and ownershipof the invention should be resolved by arbitration, pursuantto the arbitration clause in the agreement.     

Violent women: findings from the Texas women inmates study

Prior research on violent crime by female offenders is reviewed. A Texas female prisoner sample is used to explore specific questions raised by the literature review. Violent and nonviolent offenders were compared, looking specifically at race, socioeconomic status, having been raised in single-parent homes, criminal history, gang membership, marital status, and childhood abuse. Findings indicated that women who are violent were more likely to be younger, African American, unemployed, and having extensive criminal histories. They were more likely to come from dysfunctional families with childhood abuse. Limitations of the study were noted.     

Toleration without Liberal Foundations

The author's aim is to find principles grounding and limiting toleration that are sufficiently sensitive to the variety of distinct settings in which concrete problems arise, and to produce principles which can appeal both to liberals and to non-liberals. The range of settings is covered by fixing the nature of three distinct species of the genus right to toleration. Once these rights are analysed, an attempt is made to see what agreement about them can be reached by liberals and non-liberals if they have a common commitment to democracy. A definition of democracy is produced that, it is argued, liberals and non-liberals would have difficulty rejecting. It is then explored as a definition that has definite consequences over the three rights to toleration, putting the opponents before a choice: either to accept their preferred content for the right to toleration, or to support a democratic policy.