“Finding and Citing the 'Unimportant' Decisions of the U.S. Courts of Appeals”
Cornell Legal Studies Research Paper No. 08-015
By Peter W. Martin
Abstract: A Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure (2006) overturned past policies in several circuits that banned or severely limited citation of unpublished or nonprecedential opinions. This paper surveys the challenges of searching for, retrieving, and citing unpublished or nonprecedential decisions of the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals without using costly services. It also sets out a few straightforward steps the federal judiciary might take that would fulfill the promise of the E-Government Act's provisions.

“Land Virtues”
Cornell Law Review, forthcoming
By Eduardo M. Peñalver
Abstract: This article has two goals. First, it explores some of the descriptive and normative shortcomings of traditional law and economics discussions of land use and ownership. The shortcomings of traditional law and economics theories of land use point toward the benefits of a pluralist theory of property based on the Aristotelian tradition of virtue ethics. Setting forth the broad outlines of such a theory as it applies to the law of land use is the second goal of this article. Virtue theory, the author argues, is capable of incorporating the valuable insights that have made economic analysis so appealing to land use theorists without distorting our moral vision or treating economic consequences as the only considerations that ought to matter.

"Cultural Conflicts"
Law and Contemporary Problems, forthcoming
By Annelise Riles
Abstract: This article builds upon insights from contemporary anthropology to rethink the field of conflicts as a matter of cultural conflict, shifting the analysis away from the dominant approaches in the discipline. Drawing on a case of conflict between Native American legal norms and U.S. state and federal law, this article argues for a conflicts methodology that takes seriously the role of cultural description in the process of cultural adjudication.

“Cultural Competency in Capital Mitigation”
Hofstra Law Review, Vol. 36, No. 3, 2008
By Christopher Seeds and Scharlette Holdman (from the Center for Capital Assistance)
Abstract: Cultural factors so pervasively influence the interactions of the client with other people—including all of those with whom he comes into contact at significant times in his life, those surrounding him in the community in which he develops, and, critically, the members of the defense team—that it is imperative for the defense team to have the talents necessary to conduct a mitigation investigation that is culturally competent. This article details what capital defense counsel needs to do in order to (a) meet that standard and (b) of equal importance, utilize the fruits of the investigation to construct a persuasive narrative of the client's life course that emerges authentically from his culture.

“The Jurisprudence of Pleading: Rights, Rules, and Conley v. Gibson”
Howard Law Journal, forthcoming
By Emily L. Sherwin
Abstract: In 1957, in the case of Conley v. Gibson, the Supreme Court announced a minimal standard for the contents of a complaint under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and endorsed what has come to be known as 'notice' pleading. This article, prepared for a symposium on Conley, reviews the debate over pleading requirements that preceded the case and sets out my interpretation of the pre-Conley pleading debate, then describes the rather haphazard way in which the debate was resolved. It concludes with some brief comments on the implications of the early debate for civil rights litigation.