A National Tax Bar: An End to the Attorney-Accountant Tax Turf War

Although current case law is divided regarding when an accountant is practicing law, this Article will explore different approaches to this problem. Specifically, Part II of this Article explores which entities control the regulation of the legal profession. Next, Part III examines the impact of the state courts on the issue of unauthorized legal practice. Part IV touches on the related issue of privilege and the treatment of attorney-client privilege in the context of tax practice. Further, Part V considers whether tax practice should be considered the practice of law, and Part VI of this Article examines the legal profession\u27s obligation to regulate the practice of law. Finally, Part VII proposes new educational requirements and the establishment of a tax bar to assure the public of some minimum standard of education and competency in the area of taxation

The Effect of Tort Reform on Tort Case Filings

Does so-called tort reform decrease tort case filings? In Texas and other states that have enacted numerous rounds of tort reform, the answer appears to be a resounding yes, at least as of the year 2000. More recent evidence from Oklahoma supports that conclusion and provides an interesting case study within the tort reform juggernaut. During at least the past twenty years, tort reformers have achieved substantial legislative successes and, some would argue, public relations victories. Yet their desire for more reform seems insatiable, and their legislative agenda rarely sleeps. Tort reform bills bloom perennially in the Oklahoma legislature, and numerous significant changes in liability rules, restrictions on remedies, and procedural innovations were enacted in 2002, 2003, and 2004. Despite their apparent success, tort reformers spun these victories as losses and vowed to press on. One omnibus tort reform bill passed by the legislature in 2007 was immediately vetoed by the governor. Its supporters, apparently undeterred, resurrected most of the provisions from the defeated 2007 bill and reintroduced them in 2008. One might reasonably ask whether anyone has stopped to see what, if anything, the enacted reforms have already wrought, before advocating even more sweeping changes. This article will make a small contribution toward answering that question

Operation Desert Storm, R. E. Lee or W. T. Sherman?

Many are unaware of the phenomenal benefits that our military has most certainly drawn from General Lee. Curiously, this was brought out by the battle in the Persian Gulf, When reporters asked General Schwarzkopf which military leaders he most admired, Schwarzkopf, as expected, turned to the War Between the States for his examples. What was totally unexpected to some, however, was that he departed from the opinions of recent prominent American military leaders who typically cited General Lee, and instead cited General William T. Sherman as one of his heroes As this article will assert, the United States of America was fortunate that both General Schwarzkopf and the forces under his command emulated the tactics and humanity of the Confederate General instead of the Union leader he mentioned. Although General Schwarzkopf’s public admiration for General Sherman really raised little concern about the soundness of America’s military strategy or its willingness to abide by the law of war in the conduct of hostilities, his recognition of Sherman and exclusion of Lee does raise several critical issues. First, recognizing the importance of image projection, it provides an opportunity to examine the roots of America’s international reputation in terms of war-making and the role of law in regulating this conduct. Second, from both a tactical and law-of-war perspective, whom did our commanders and soldiers most emulate-Robert E. Lee or William T. Sherman

Storm Clouds on the Horizon of Darwinism: Teaching the Anthropic Principle and Intelligent Design in the Public Schools

Professor Addicott’s article addresses the future legal ramifications that the fledgling intelligent design movement and the scientific concept known as the Anthropic Principle will have on the teaching of Darwinian evolution in public schools. Both ideas are associated with the concept that an “unnamed” intelligent designer is responsible for the creation and sustainment of life. Predicting that the Supreme Court will ultimately allow, for instance, school boards to incorporate intelligent design in the science curriculum, he believes neither of the two ideas violate the Establishment Clause and cannot be “dismissed as yet another back door attempt by creationists to get a sectarian religious idea into the public schools.” In tracing the evolution/creation debate, Professor Addicott clearly establishes all the interested segments in the controversy to include the Fundamentalist creationists and “Darwinian activists.” Interestingly, in evaluating how the Court will view intelligent design, Professor Addicott explores what he terms the “Darwinian paradigm”―arguing that Darwinian activists may have already violated the Establishment Clause by making Darwinian evolution its own religion

Oh Lord Won't You Buy Me a Mercedes Benz: A Comparison of State Wrongful Conviction Compensation Statutes

The purpose of this Article is to compare state compensation statutes in an effort to assist those working to enact compensation legislation. Inevitably, legislators want to know what other states are doing and the content of other state compensation statutes. It is helpful for those advocating for state legislation to be able to compare the existing twenty-eight statutes. For that reason, this Article is organized to be most helpful in comparing the subject matter and provisions most often of concern to legislators and to those advocating for compensation legislation when deciding what to consider and include in their own state compensation statute. Noting that compensation statutes are not uniform, and some state statutes are poorly constructed, this Article will endeavor to address the common elements in compensation statutes, while also analyzing the elements most essential to a thorough compensation package. These points generally include where to file, time limits on filing, appointment of counsel and payment of fees, who can collect, offsets, tax exemptions, compensation amount and in what form, subrogation, and future claims

How the Poor are Getting Poorer: The Proliferation of Payday Loans in Texas via State Charter Renting

This Comment focuses on the nature of payday loans in Texas, including what a payday loan is, its cost to borrowers, and a brief discussion of how the payday loan industry is thriving. In order to understand these problems, a review of the relevant Texas usury laws as well as Texas statutes and the scope of their coverage as they relate to payday loans will be examined. Furthermore, the most favored lender doctrine as well as the exportation doctrine will be discussed, as these two doctrines permit payday lenders to avoid Texas law. Then, the unique relationship between payday lenders and federally regulated, state-chartered banks will be analyzed, as the nature of this relationship raises several concerns. Possible reforms include prohibiting lenders from being able to target the economically disadvantaged, and legislation that would impose severe penalties on lenders who take advantage of borrowers. In addition, a number of solutions will be proposed, which include (1) having the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) properly regulate the state-chartered banks they insure, (2) creating new Texas law that, instead of attacking the usurious interest rates, seeks to eliminate the practice of payday lending in Texas, and (3) providing borrowers with low credit an alternative to payday loans that does not trap them in a cycle of debt

Standing to Sue: Extending Third-Party Standing to Physician-Providers to Enforce the Medicaid Act (Comment)

This comment advocates for the right of physicians to assert constitutional rights on behalf of indigent patients in an action against the State of Texas for equitable reimbursement rates under the Medicaid Act. Part I of this comment explores the legislative intent and history of the Medicaid Act, in an attempt to understand its purpose in providing healthcare coverage to the poor of the nation. Part II examines the current condition of healthcare coverage, both private and public, available within the State of Texas. This assessment also delves into the extrinsic effects of an existing populace living without healthcare coverage. The final section is an analysis of previous legal attempts to secure equity in Medicaid. In conclusion, this comment advocates for the right of physicians to invoke the constitutional protection of Medicaid recipients who lack the resources to assert those rights on their own behalf

A Thrice-Told Tale, or Felix the Cat

The manual I intend to present focuses on the importance of Felix Frankfurter. In discussing the historical understanding of the Justices of the Supreme Court, Professor John Henry Schlegel wrote, "there is the problem of Felix Frankfurter." Justice Frankfurter remains a problem if one wants to understand twentieth-century legal history. His influence as a law professor and intellectual activist, his influence as a member of the Court, and his influence directing the work of other constitutional scholars must be taken into account when assessing constitutional histories. In this Article, I suggest that Justice Felix Frankfurter tried to coordinate history to protect the integrity of the Court as he saw it, and that he succeeded

Resurrection of the Prohibition on the Corporate Practice of Medicine: Teaching Old Dogma New Tricks

Unfortunately, the federal government has become a willing participant in the risk-sharing strategy. The federal government has undermined the corporate practice doctrine and has adopted risk-sharing strategies of its own. The federal government needs to embrace the prohibition on the corporate practice of medicine in order to prevent insurance companies from shifting the financing function to physicians. Only then can we reveal the true costs of maintaining the system of private health insurance. Part II of this Article will examine the premises underlying the corporate practice of medicine doctrine. This Part will reveal that the doctrine resulted from a mixture of protectionist motives on the part of organized medicine and an idealized conception of the physician-patient relationship by the courts. Part III will examine how federal policy helped lead to the demise of the doctrine. This Part will reveal that the federal government was more concerned about cost containment than with preserving an idealized physician-patient relationship. Part IV will describe the financial risk-shifting mechanisms that have arisen in response to the need to control health care costs. Part V will explain how risk sharing is either dangerous because of its potential to alter the physician-patient relationship, or dishonest because it merely allows private sector payers to benefit from a hidden public subsidy. Part VI will examine how a healthy respect for the rationales underlying the corporate practice doctrine would lead to a prohibition on risk-sharing arrangements. Part V1I then describes the inadequate federal response to risksharing arrangements. Finally, Part VIII describes why the danger and dishonesty of risk sharing cannot be ameliorated by any means other than a blanket prohibition on the practice

The United States' Failure to Ratify the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Must the Poor Be Always with Us

This Article proposes that the United States should ratify the ICESCR. The treaty's requirements are to be met over a period of time, according to the abilities of each member state. This ought to eliminate concerns about interference with the United States' sovereignty, and about the methods, costs, and means of implementing the treaty. Part II of this Article provides the context and content of the ICESCR, including its status in the United States. Part III examines the current status of poverty in the United States, and current attempts to address poverty through domestic remedies and legislation. Part IV demonstrates ways in which the ICESCR could effectively address problems faced by poor people in the U. S. Finally, this Article reaches two conclusions from which a solution may follow: there is no legitimate reason for poverty to persist in this country, and the United States is simply out of synch with the rest of the world in its legal approach to poverty. We need not accept poverty as an inevitable fact of life in this country; with the proper legal tools and internalization of the proper norms, we may find that, in fact, we need not always have the poor with us