Gordon Douglas Womack, Appellant/Petitioner v. Stacey Lee Womack Leavitt and Nicholle Womack Hendricksom, Appellees/Respondents : Reply Brief of Appellant

On Certiorari Review to the Utah Court of Appeals\u27 Opinion in In Re Estate of Womack, 2016 Ut App. 83, 372 P.3D 690, From the Ruling and Order Entered By The Eighth District Judicial court, In and for Duchesne County, State of Uta

Vanderwal v. Albar, Inc. Respondent\u27s Brief Dckt. 38085

https://digitalcommons.law.uidaho.edu/idaho_supreme_court_record_briefs/4480/thumbnail.jp

A Decolonial Critique of the Racialized “Localwashing” of Extraction in Central Africa

Responding to calls for increased attention to actions and reactions “from above” within the extractive industry, we offer a decolonial critique of the ways in which corporate entities and multinational institutions propagate racialized rhetoric of “local” suffering, “local” consultation, and “local” fault for failure in extractive zones. Such rhetoric functions to legitimize extractive intervention within a set of practices that we call localwashing. Drawing from a decade of research on and along the Chad-Cameroon Oil Pipeline, we show how multi-scalar actors converged to assert knowledge of, responsibility for, and collaborations with “local” people within a racialized politics of scale. These corporate representations of the racialized “local” are coded through long-standing colonial tropes. We identify three interrelated and overlapping flexian elite rhetoric(s) and practices of racialized localwashing: (a) anguishing, (b) arrogating, and (c) admonishing. These elite representations of a racialized “local” reveal diversionary efforts “from above” to manage public opinion, displace blame for project failures, and domesticate dissent in a context of persistent scrutiny and criticism from international and regional advocates and activists

Responsibility, Lawyering, Justice

Between 1942 and 1946, approximately 112,000 persons of Japanese ancestry were ordered to leave their homes and were transported to internment camps where they were held under armed guard. Four cases litigated before the United States Supreme Court dealt with orders related to this policy: Hirabayishi v. United States, Yasui v. United States, Korematsu v. United States, and ex parte Endo. Property deprivation related to internment was at issue in Oyama v. California. This note discusses whether the Solicitor General of the United States violated a duty of candor in Hirabayashi and Yasui or in Korematsu. That question requires analysis of subsidiary questions relating to representation of entity clients generally, and of government clients in particular. It also provides opportunity for analysis of broader questions regarding the extent of the duty of loyalty

Sharon and Gene Atkinson v. Gem Insurance Company, & Premier Medical Network & Sara Meadowcroft and John Does 1 to 20, inclusive : Reply Brief

REPLY BRIEF OF PLAINTIFFS - APPELLANTS ATKINSON Appeal from the Third J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t Court S a l t Lake County, State of Utah, Honorable HOMER WILKINSON, Judge Presiding