No Judge,No Job! Court errors and the contingent labor contract

Judges are prone to error and misapprehension when they are verifying the facts of a legal case. We analyze the significance and scope of accurate court decisions and judicial error for labor contracting and identify the implications of these concepts on behavioral incentives and market outcomes. We find that imperfect judicial state verification and the diverging beliefs on a court ruling reduce the efficiency of contingent labor contracts and make them less effective in stipulating sufficient incentives for compliance. If increasing court accuracy in general is not feasible, the courts (and the legislator) should primarily mitigate type I errors. The common reversal of the burden of proof to the employer in labor laws reflects these insights. The model also indicates that the ability of judges to verify facts is a prerequisite for efficient law-making and contributes significantly to the economic role of courts.     

Examining the Impact of Early Childhood School Investments on Neighborhood Crime

This study tested the hypothesis that investments in early childhood schools have short-term crime reducing effects in neighborhoods. Time series data from the city of Tulsa, Oklahoma, were analyzed to evaluate the effects of an early childhood school built in the neighborhood of Kendall-Whittier as part of a larger neighborhood revitalization plan, on violent and property crime. Results revealed that after controlling for city-wide crime trends and monthly fluctuations, violent crime declined significantly in Kendall-Whittier. Further analysis indicated that the possible crime-reducing effects of school investments on violent crime spread beyond Kendall-Whittier, and no displacement was found. The results for property crime were mixed. The study demonstrates the use of clustering analysis, a useful tool in neighborhood-level research to identify comparison neighborhoods. The findings shed light on the possibility that investments in early childhood schools can yield results in a shorter term than anticipated, making them a desirable component of urban revitalization.     

Intravascular bullet embolism to the right atrium

Bullet embolism is a relatively unusual complication of gunshot wounds. Embolism to the right atrium comprises <5% of all reported intravascular bullet emboli. We report an additional case of bullet embolus to the right atrium of a 0.38-caliber bullet following a gunshot wound to the chest. The intracardiac bullet was recognized radiologically on presentation, but the patient was hemodynamically stable and managed conservatively, with the bullet left in place. The missile remained within the heart without clinical significance for several years and was recovered from the right atrium only at the time of autopsy. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first documented case of a 0.38-caliber bullet which embolized to the right atrium and remained inconsequential for an extended period of time.     

THE FORGOTTEN BONDS: THE ASSESSMENT AND CONTEMPLATION OF SIBLING ATTACHMENT IN DIVORCE AND PARENTAL SEPARATION

Attachment theory is increasingly being considered when contemplating post‐divorce parenting plans. Historically, there has been a strong emphasis on assessing the strength of the parent‐child bond as well as a child's attachment style. Surprisingly little research has focused on sibling bonds and the implications for post‐divorce parenting plans. This article provides an overview of sibling attachment theory, sibling attachment considerations in foster care decisions, and the limited research examining sibling attachment in divorce and parenting schedules. Several key questions are offered for mental health and legal professionals to consider when factoring sibling relations into post‐separation parenting plans.     

The neurological determination of death: what does it really mean?

The recent Canadian forum's recommendations regarding "neurological determination of death" claim to have determined a "Canadian definition, criteria, and minimum testing requirements for neurological determination of death." In this review the problems with this statement are discussed. The criterion of neurological determination of death does not fulfill the definition of death, because there is continued integration of the organism as a whole. The tests for neurological determination of death do not fulfill the criterion of neurological determination of death because they do not show the irreversible loss of all critical brain functions. The forum has provided no coherent argument for why neurological determination of death should be considered death. I suggest that one cannot invoke expert opinion to clarify a criterion of death, and tests for this criterion of death, without a clear concept of what death is. The forum has clarified tests for what they call "neurological determination of death," but this is not death itself; rather, it is a neurologically devastating state. Whether this state of "neurological determination of death" is enough to justify the morality of harvesting organs prior to death is the real question. A potential solution to this question is discussed.     

Parallel Proceedings in Investor‐State Treaty Arbitration: Responses for Treaty‐Drafters,Arbitrators and Parties

Parallel investment treaty arbitrations present a demonstrated risk of inconsistent awards. This article examines several ameliorative responses to parallel investment treaty proceedings, executable by treaty‐drafters, arbitrators and parties themselves. The unique jurisdiction mechanics and applicable law in investment treaty disputes frames the responses available. Despite the unique context within which parallel investment arbitrations occur, the challenges they pose to party interests, to principles including legal fairness and to the effective pursuit of dispute resolution closely resemble those posed by parallel proceedings in other domestic and international legal fora.     

REPRESENTATION DISPARITIES AND IMPARTIALITY: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF PARTY PERCEPTION OF FEAR,PREPARATION, AND SATISFACTION IN DIVORCE MEDIATION WHEN ONLY ONE PARTY HAS COUNSEL

While other authors have regarded both the presence and the absence of attorneys in family law mediation as cause for concern, little attention has been given to the questions raised when one party is represented and the other is pro se. This article presents data on mediating parties' premediation concerns, fears, and feelings of preparedness, as well as their postmediation satisfaction with the mediation process. The mediating parties are grouped based on each couple's representation status, for example, both represented by attorneys, both pro se, or one attorney‐represented party and one pro se party (mixed representation cases). The data show that mixed representation cases are the most likely to report concern, fear, and unpreparedness. Mixed‐representation cases also reported the lowest levels of satisfaction after the mediation. Some implications for mediation practice are discussed, as are suggestions for future research.