<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Duke Law Student Papers Series</title>
<copyright>Copyright (c) 2013 Duke Law All rights reserved.</copyright>
<link>http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/studentpapers</link>
<description>Recent documents in Duke Law Student Papers Series</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 17:51:11 PDT</lastBuildDate>
<ttl>3600</ttl>








<item>
<title>Land Rights and Socio-Economic Development of Afro-Brazilian Communities</title>
<link>http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/studentpapers/4</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/studentpapers/4</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 10:58:01 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Law students and recent graduates who spent the Spring 2010 semester studying the land rights of Afro-Brazilian communities have submitted their final report to community leaders and Brazilian government officials, institutions, and non-government organizations engaged in the issue.</p>
<p>Written under the supervision of Laurence R. Helfer, the Harry R. Chadwick, Sr. Professor of Law, the report contains insights gleaned from the students’ intense study and research, both at Duke Law and on the ground in Brazil. Along with Helfer, the students spent their 2010 Spring break in Brazil as part of the seminar. They met with members of quilombos -- Afro-Brazilians communities descended from slaves -- who are seeking to secure legal title to lands they have long occupied. The students also interviewed government officials, civil society groups, anthropologists, and legal scholars who work on land rights issues in Brazil.</p>
<p>The report outlines the difficulties Afro-Latino communities have had in obtaining land rights in Central and South America, where six countries recognize some form of collective rights. The problems are especially stark in Brazil. “Nowhere are the connections between Afro-Latinos, access to land, and socioeconomic development more apparent than in Brazil,” the report states. “Afro-Brazilians comprise 45 percent of the Brazilian population, yet constitute 69 percent of those living in extreme poverty. Land ownership remains sharply concentrated, with 3.5 percent of landowners controlling over half of the arable land.”</p>
<p>Brazil’s 1988 constitution included a provision allowing quilombos to apply for collective title to lands where they have long resided. But implementation has been problematic. Applications filed by many quilombos are enmeshed in a bureaucratic quagmire, the report found.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Noah Browne et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>The Power of Posner: A Study of Prestige and Influence in the Federal Judiciary</title>
<link>http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/studentpapers/3</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/studentpapers/3</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 05:55:43 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Some judges have a disproportionate influence over the American judiciary; existing research has shown Judge Richard Posner is one of those judges. Our goal was to identify and determine how Judge Posner’s influence has changed over time. To measure and track his influence, we collected and compared citation and invocation data from three distinct time frames. While these measurements are imperfect, they can help illustrate the level of influence and prestige Judge Posner enjoys. The existing literature led us to expect Judge Posner’s early citation rates to be low. After several years on the bench, the citation rates for each opinion should rise dramatically. By contrast, Judge Posner’s citation rates are exceptionally high from the outset while more recent opinions actually have lower citation rates.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Ryan P. Thompson et al.</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Promoting and Establishing the Recovery of Endangered Species on Private Lands: A Case Study of the Gopher Tortoise</title>
<link>http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/studentpapers/2</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/studentpapers/2</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 09:11:20 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Important species are increasingly becoming endangered on private lands largely left unregulated by federal and state laws. The gopher tortoise is one such species. The tortoise is a keystone species, meaning that upon its existence numerous other species exist. Despite its importance, tortoise populations have declined by 80% - partly due to development pressures, but primarily due to forest management practices which have reduced the longleaf pine ecosystem upon which it depends. This article focus on legal and policy issues associated with both development and forest management. Because private forest management practices are the primary cause of tortoise decline, the article concludes by suggesting management practices which can benefit both private landowners and the tortoise.</p>
<p>Blake Hudson, J.D. candidate, Duke Law '07.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Blake Hudson</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Art Deaccessions and the Limits of Fiduciary Duty</title>
<link>http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/studentpapers/1</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/studentpapers/1</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 09:11:19 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Art deaccessions prompt lawsuits against museums, and some commentators advocate using the stricter trust standard of care, instead of the prevailing corporate standard (business judgment rule), to evaluate the conduct of non‑profit museum boards. This Article explores the consequences of adopting the trust standard by applying it to previously unavailable deaccession policies of prominent art museums. It finds that so long as museum boards adhere to these policies, their decisions would satisfy the trust standard. This outcome illustrates an important limitation of fiduciary law: the trust standard evaluates procedural care but cannot assess deaccessions on their merits. Yet this limitation, far from undercutting the trust rule, balances judicial review with protecting boards’ management discretion. This Article ventures beyond formalist analysis of fiduciary duty and examines the non‑legal, substantive rules governing art deaccessions. It argues that complemented by non‑legal rules, the trust standard provides the best framework for adjudicating deaccession lawsuits because it ensures judicial scrutiny of deaccession procedures while leaving appraisal of deaccessions’ merits to museum professionals and the public they serve.</p>
<p>Sue Chen  J.D. Duke Law School '09</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Sue Chen</author>


</item>





</channel>
</rss>
