Easing the Burden: Mediating Misdemeanor Criminal Complaints

Overburdened courts are causing critical breakdowns in the criminal justice system. However, some jurisdictions are developing creative programs to ease the burden on courts. This paper focuses on mediation programs by which courts divert criminal cases away from traditional prosecution and allow a victim-offender mediation to occur as an alternative to trials for alleged criminal acts. The new model is beginning to work: annually more than nine thousand cases are referred out of district courts by district attorneys and judges to dispute settlement centers; over seven thousand or more are resolved prior to possible court involvement, and mediation is helping as an alternative to courtroom trials

Constitutional Law—State Employees Have Private Cause of Action against Employers under Family and Medical Leave Act—Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs, 538 U.S. 721 (2003).

The Eleventh Amendment of the United States Constitution provides that non-consenting states are not subject to suit in federal court. Congress may, however, abrogate the states’ sovereign immunity by enacting legislation to enforce the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment. In Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs, the Supreme Court of the United States considered whether Congress acted within its constitutional authority by abrogating sovereign immunity under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which allows private causes of action against state employers to enforce the FMLA’s family-leave provision. The Court held abrogation was proper under the FMLA and state employees could bring private actions against their employers because Congress acted within its constitutional authority when it passed the FMLA for the purpose of remedying a history of gender-based discrimination in the workplace

Gabriel H. Teninbaum on The Witnesses: War Crimes and the Promise of Justice in The Hague by Eric Stover. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005. 230 pp.

A review of: The Witnesses: War Crimes and the Promise of Justice in The Hague by Eric Stover. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005. 230 pp

An exploration of the implementation of open disclosure of adverse events in the UK : a scoping review and qualitative exploration

Background: In 2009 the UK National Patient Safety Agency relaunched its Being Open framework to facilitate the open disclosure of adverse events to patients in the NHS. The implementation of the framework has been, and remains, challenging in practice. Aim: The aim of this work was to both critically evaluate and extend the current evidence base relating to open disclosure, with a view to supporting the implementation of a policy of open disclosure of adverse events in the NHS. Methods: This work was conducted in three phases. The first phase comprised two focused systematic literature reviews, one summarising empirical research on the effectiveness of interventions to enhance open disclosure, and a second, broader scoping review, looking at reports of current opinion and practice and wider knowledge. The second phase involved primary qualitative research with the objective of generating new knowledge about UK-based stakeholders' views on their role in and experiences of open disclosure. Stakeholder interviews were analysed using the framework approach. The third phase synthesised the findings from the first two phases to inform and develop a set of short pragmatic suggestions for NHS trust management, to facilitate the implementation and evaluation of open disclosure. Results: A total of 610 papers met the inclusion criteria for the broad review. A large body of literature discussed open disclosure from a number of related, but sometimes conflicted, perspectives. Evidential gaps persist and current practice is based largely on expert consensus rather than evidence. There appears to be a tension between the existing pragmatic guidance and the more in-depth critiques of what being consistent and transparent in health care really means. Eleven papers met the inclusion criteria for the more focused review. There was little evidence for the effectiveness of disclosure alone on organisational or individual outcomes or of interventions to promote and support open disclosure. Interviews with stakeholders identified strong support for the basic principle of being honest with patients or relatives when someone was seriously harmed by health care. In practice however, the issues are complex and there is confusion about a number of issues relating to disclosure policies in the UK. The interviews generated insights into the difficulties perceived within health care at individual and institutional levels, in relation to fully implementing the Being Open guidance. Conclusions: There are several clear strategies that the NHS could learn from to implement and sustain a policy of openness. Literature reviews and stakeholder accounts both identified the potential benefits of a culture that was generally more open (not just retrospectively open about serious harm). Future work could usefully evaluate the impact of disclosure on legal challenges within the NHS, best practice in models of support and training for open disclosure, embedding disclosure conversations in critical incident analysis and disclosure of less serious events

Spaced Repetition: A Method for Learning More Law in Less Time

Spaced repetition is a learning method that allows people to learn far more, in far less time. Discovered more than 100 years ago, recent advances in mobile technology have made its potential even greater to change the way law students, bar preppers and others in the legal field learn. This article describes the science of spaced repetition and its potential uses in law. It also describes the author’s work in building a platform for law students, SpacedRepetition.com to allow them to harness this technology. Early findings are both exciting and consistent with the benefits of this method found in other fields. In one recent use of the technology, an entire graduating law school class was offered the chance to use SpacedRepetition.com to supplement their traditional bar preparation courses. Those who used the spaced repetition method passed the bar exam at a rate 19.2% higher than students who did not make use of it