Nationstar Mortg., LLC v. Saticoy Bay LLC Series 2227 Shadow Canyon, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 409 (Nov. 22, 2017)

The Court considered an appeal from a district court order granting summary judgment. In its holding, the Court concluded that it would not invalidate a foreclosure sale based on a low sales price alone. The commercial reasonableness standard established by Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code (U.C.C.) does not apply to Homeowner’s Association (HOA) foreclosures because they involve real property sales. Rather, there must be a showing of “fraud, unfairness, or oppression” on behalf of the seller

State v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 13 (Mar. 1, 2018) (en banc)

The Court determined that when the State conducts a direct-examination of a witness during a preliminary hearing, and then the defendant waives his right to that preliminary hearing, the defendant is said to have had an “adequate opportunity” to confront that witness as long as adequate discovery was available

Some Reflections on the Success and Failure of the Constitution

Presented in a panel discussion as part of the University of Dayton\u27s series of programs commemorating the bicentennial of the Constitution, Dayton, Ohio, October 15, 1986

Making Noninterpretivism Respectable: Michael J. Perry\u27s Contributions to Constitutional Theory

A Review of The Constitution, The Courts, and Human Rights: An Inquiry into the Legitimacy of Constitutional Policymaking by the Judiciary by Michael J. Perr

Judicial Review and the National Political Process: A Functional Reconsideration of the Role of the Supreme Court (By Jesse H. Choper)

We have come to an important crossroad in constitutional law. Academic commentators are calling for a broad reexamination of traditional assumptions about the role that both the Constitution and Supreme Court can and should play in our society. Some critics of the Court complain that it takes too narrow a view of the Constitution, while others have argued that the court interprets it too broadly. Despite differences in perspective, most will no doubt agree with Professor Leff’s observation that “it is awfully hard to be a credible constitution thinker by treating the Constitution as irrelevant.” Perhaps it is time to look for new arguments to establish the relevance of constitutional law and the Court in American society in traditional terms or to establish new criteria by which relevance is to be determined. The sense that constitutional law is entering a new phase is not necessarily confined to the scholarly community. Anyone familiar with recent developments in the Supreme Court is likely to conclude that the Court is uncertain of precisely what it and the Constitution stand for. Moreover, the recent Presidential election has made us aware of the imminent change in the composition of the Court and the likely disruption of whatever agreement that may exist among the Justices with respect to doing constitutional law. Professor Choper’s recent book has made a substantial contribution to the prevailing notion that constitutional theory must enter a new phrase

Ohio Constitutional Interpretation

Saphire provides a detailed review and critique of the Ohio Supreme Court\u27s interpretive methodology since 1984. This examination, superb in itself, is rendered all the more valuable by Saphire\u27s inclusion of two other discussions - one placing the Ohio experience in a larger historical context, the other probing the legitimacy and limits of New Judicial Federalism. Saphire concludes that the Ohio Supreme Court\u27s commitment to state constitutional independence has been marked by inconsistency and ambivalence. This trend will continue, he suggests, until the court develops and articulates a theory of Ohio constitutional interpretation - something that it has so far completely failed to do. Such a theory would have to provide answers to questions like: When is the text sufficiently ambiguous that a judge may look beyond the words? To what extent may judges consult historical sources, contemporary sources, and policy considerations when construing the text? To what extent and in what ways should they adopt approaches to interpretation that allow for greater or lesser degrees of judicial discretion? In the end, Saphire, like Williams, believes that lawyers and scholars can play a constructive role in suggesting answers to these questions and thereby promoting the independence of the Ohio Constitution