Dogs and Contracts

BahariA few years ago I had the good fortune of getting to know Dr. Marty Greer when she was a student in the Law School’s part-time program. Dr. Greer is a veterinarian and lawyer in Lomira, Wisconsin. While in law school, Dr. Greer brought a service dog in training to class with her. The dog, Bahari, even attended her Law School graduation. (See photo)

Over the years, Dr. Greer and I have chatted about the intersection of contract law and dog ownership. When entering into a relationship with a purebred dog, it’s important for a potential owner to realize that he or she is entering into a legal contract with the dog’s breeder.

A contract for the sale of an animal can be complicated. Positive communication and decision making early in the negotiation process are important for establishing a good relationship between a breeder and a potential owner. A contract for an animal creates a three-way relationship for the animal, the new owner(s), and the breeder(s). People’s emotions, as well as the dog’s well-being, are at stake. When done right, lifelong friendships can result. While this blog is not intended to provide legal advice, my questions and Dr. Greer’s answers are designed to give a reader a sense of the things the parties need to consider when contemplating the purchase of a dog.

Continue ReadingDogs and Contracts

Sentence Not Improperly Enhanced Based on Defendant’s Silence, Seventh Circuit Rules

At sentencing, defendants are expected to express remorse for their crimes.  Indeed, the defendant who fails to impress the judge with the sincerity of his contrition is apt to face a longer sentence on that basis.  But what if the defendant chooses to say nothing at all at sentencing?  On the one hand, a judge might infer a lack of remorse from the defendant’s silence.  But, on the other, there seems some tension between penalizing a defendant’s failure to speak and the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.

The Seventh Circuit addressed this tension earlier today in United States v. Keskes (No. 12-1127) (Tinder, J.).  Convicted of mail fraud, Keskes apparently declined the opportunity to allocute at his sentencing.  The district judge then made note of this in finding a lack of remorse and increasing Keskes’ sentence on that basis.  On appeal, Keskes argued that the sentence violated his right to remain silent.  The Seventh Circuit, however, affirmed.

Continue ReadingSentence Not Improperly Enhanced Based on Defendant’s Silence, Seventh Circuit Rules

Lessons From Sixteen Years of the PLRA and AEDPA

I have some reflections on the great 1996 prisoner litigation reforms in an essay newly uploaded to SSRN.  Here is the abstract:

In 1996, Congress adopted two sweeping statutes that were intended to restrict the ability of prisoners to obtain redress in federal court for violations of their constitutional rights. This essay introduces an issue of the Federal Sentencing Reporter assessing the legacy of these two laws, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty and Prison Litigation Reform Acts, and considers the extent to which these statutes highlight structural flaws in the way that the political and legal systems engage with prisoner litigation.

The essay, entitled “Not So Sweet: Questions Raised by Sixteen Years of the PLRA and AEDPA,” was published at 24 Fed. Sent. Rep. 223 (2012).

Continue ReadingLessons From Sixteen Years of the PLRA and AEDPA