2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018
Browse
by subject...
    Schedule
view...
 

1 - 10 of 134 results for: LAW

LAW 224B: Federal Litigation: Methods and Practice

This course is part of the required first-year JD curriculum. It is an introductory course in the litigation process. Students represent the plaintiff or defendant in a simulated public interest case set in a federal district court that raises complex issues of federal civil procedure, privacy, and first amendment law. Students plan litigation strategy, draft pleadings, conduct discovery, write short briefs, and orally argue major motions for dismissal, class action certification, and preliminary injunctive relief. While developing students' written and oral advocacy skills, the course also focuses on substantive issues of civil procedure and constitutional law. Attendance, class participation and written assignments. This course is open to first-year Law School students only.
Terms: Win, Spr | Units: 2 | Grading: Law Honors/Pass/Restrd Cr/Fail

LAW 400: Directed Research

Directed Research is an extraordinary opportunity for students beyond the first-year to research problems in any field of law. The final product must be embodied in a paper or other form of written work involving a substantial independent effort on the part of the student. A student must submit a detailed petition of at least 250 words, approved by the sponsoring faculty member, outlining his or her proposed project and demonstrating that the research is likely to result in a significant scholarly contribution. A petition will not be approved for work assigned or performed in a course, clinic, or externship for which the student has or will receive credit. A petition must indicate whether the product is intended for publication in a law review or elsewhere. A student may petition for "Directed Research: Curricular Development" when the work involves assisting a Law School faculty member in developing concepts or materials for new and innovative law school courses. Both the supervising more »
Directed Research is an extraordinary opportunity for students beyond the first-year to research problems in any field of law. The final product must be embodied in a paper or other form of written work involving a substantial independent effort on the part of the student. A student must submit a detailed petition of at least 250 words, approved by the sponsoring faculty member, outlining his or her proposed project and demonstrating that the research is likely to result in a significant scholarly contribution. A petition will not be approved for work assigned or performed in a course, clinic, or externship for which the student has or will receive credit. A petition must indicate whether the product is intended for publication in a law review or elsewhere. A student may petition for "Directed Research: Curricular Development" when the work involves assisting a Law School faculty member in developing concepts or materials for new and innovative law school courses. Both the supervising faculty member and the Associate Dean for Curriculum must approve petition for "Directed Research: Curricular Development." Students must meet with the instructor frequently for the purposes of report and guidance. Unit credit is by arrangement. Students whose projects warrant more than four units should consider a Senior Thesis or the Research Track. See SLS Student Handbook for requirements and limitations. With the approval of the instructor, a directed research project of two-units or more may satisfy one research writing course (R course). Elements used in grading: As agreed to by instructor. Directed Research petitions are available on the Law School Registrar's Office website (see Forms and Petitions).
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 1-4 | Repeatable for credit | Grading: Law Mixed H/P/R/F or MP/R/F

LAW 403: Senior Thesis

An opportunity for third-year students to engage in original research and to prepare a substantial written-work product on the scale of a law review article. The thesis topic should be chosen no later than two weeks after the beginning of the seventh term of law study and may be chosen during the sixth term. The topic is subject to the approval of the thesis supervisor, who may be any member of the Law School faculty under whose direction the student wishes to write the thesis and who is willing to assume the responsibility therefor. An oral defense of the thesis before members of the faculty, including the thesis supervisor, will be conducted late in the student's ninth academic term. Acceptance of the thesis for credit requires the approval of the thesis supervisor and one or more other members of the faculty who will be selected by the supervisor. Satisfactory completion of the senior thesis will satisfy graduation requirements to the extent of (a) 5 - 8 units of credit and (b) two research courses. The exact requirements for a senior thesis are in the discretion of the supervising faculty member. Special Instructions: Two Research credits are possible. Elements Used in Grading: Paper
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 5-8 | Repeatable for credit | Grading: Law Mixed H/P/R/F or MP/R/F

LAW 406: Research Track

The Research Track is for students who wish to carry out a research project of a scope larger than that contemplated for a Senior Thesis. Research Track projects are to be supervised by two or more professors, at least one of whom must be a member of the Law School faculty. At least one faculty member in addition to the supervisors must read the written product of the research, and the student must defend the written work orally before the readers. Students will be admitted to Research Track only if they have a demonstrated capability for substantial independent research, and propose a significant and well-formulated project at the time of application. Special Instructions: Two Research credits are possible. Elements Used in Grading: Paper
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 9-12 | Repeatable for credit | Grading: Law Mixed H/P/R/F or MP/R/F

LAW 411: Directed Writing

Teams of students may earn "Directed Writing" credit for collaborative problems involving professional writing, such as briefs, proposed legislation or other legal writing. Only projects supervised by a member of the faculty (tenured, tenure-track, senior lecturer, or professor from practice) may qualify for Directed Writing credit. It will not necessarily be appropriate to require each member of the team to write the number of pages that would be required for an individual directed research project earning the number of units that each team member will earn for the team project. The page length guidelines applicable to individual papers may be considered in determining the appropriate page length, but the faculty supervisor has discretion to make the final page-length determination. Students must meet with the instructor frequently for the purposes of report and guidance. Unit credit is by arrangement. A petition will not be approved for work assigned or performed in a course, clinic, or externship for which the student has or will receive credit. Special Instructions: A Directed Writing project may not count as the equivalent of a "PW" (Professional Writing) course.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 1-4 | Repeatable for credit | Grading: Law Mixed H/P/R/F or MP/R/F

LAW 802: TGR: Dissertation

Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 0 | Repeatable for credit | Grading: TGR

LAW 805F: Policy Practicum: Endstage Decisions

(Formerly Law 413Z) Medical decisions toward the end of life can be crucial and difficult for patients, doctors, and families. Law and medicine have been struggling to find ways to strike a balance between what the patients might want (or say they want), and what makes medical, economic, and ethical sense. One standard is the "Advanced Health Care Directive" (Directive), which guides doctors and surrogates (usually a family member) on what to do when faced with end-of-life dilemmas. Another form, adopted in just over half the states (including California) is the POLST (Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment). The two types are supposed to complement each other, but they are different in important ways. The Advanced Health Care Directive expresses what a person wants and/or appoints a surrogate in case the patient is unable to express her wishes. Anybody can fill out a Directive, at any time of life. Ideally, a copy goes to the surrogate, if one is appointed, and another to the more »
(Formerly Law 413Z) Medical decisions toward the end of life can be crucial and difficult for patients, doctors, and families. Law and medicine have been struggling to find ways to strike a balance between what the patients might want (or say they want), and what makes medical, economic, and ethical sense. One standard is the "Advanced Health Care Directive" (Directive), which guides doctors and surrogates (usually a family member) on what to do when faced with end-of-life dilemmas. Another form, adopted in just over half the states (including California) is the POLST (Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment). The two types are supposed to complement each other, but they are different in important ways. The Advanced Health Care Directive expresses what a person wants and/or appoints a surrogate in case the patient is unable to express her wishes. Anybody can fill out a Directive, at any time of life. Ideally, a copy goes to the surrogate, if one is appointed, and another to the primary care physician. The POLST form is meant for people who are seriously ill. The Directive (for example "no artificial nutrition by tube") is supposed to be controlling; the patient, of course, can change her mind; but there is no surrogate. It is an agreement between the patient and the doctor. Who uses these different forms? How effective are they? To what extent and in what situations are they useful? Working closely with Stanford Hospital as the client, students will not only look at current literature on the topic and build on past practicum research, but also conduct interviews with doctors, nurses, and other health care specialists with the goal of finding out what local hospitals and nursing homes are doing. The aim is to get a more realistic picture of the what one might call the living law of the Directive and the POLST. The ultimate goal is policy recommendations to improve the forms and associated laws and to examine alternative approaches. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Final Paper. -- NOTE: Students may not count more than a combined total of eight units of directed research projects and policy lab practica toward graduation unless the additional counted units are approved in advance by the Petitions Committee. Such approval will be granted only for good cause shown. Even in the case of a successful petition for additional units, a student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Directed Writing, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. For detailed information, see "Directed Research/Policy Labs" in the SLS Student Handbook. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS website (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms). See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 1-3 | Repeatable for credit | Grading: Law Honors/Pass/Restrd Cr/Fail

LAW 806A: Policy Practicum: Voting Technology

CLIENT: Committee on the Future of Voting of the National Academies of Sciences. The Committee on the Future of Voting is seeking Practicum research support for an exhaustive study of technology, standards, and resources for voting technologies, including challenges related to the 2016 election. As described on the website for National Academies of Science, Engineering, & Medicine, this "ad hoc committee, under the auspices of the Committee on Science, Technology and Law and the Computer Science and Telecommunications Board, will conduct a study that will: (1) document the current state of play in terms of technology, standards, and resources for voting technologies; (2) examine challenges arising out of the 2016 federal election; (3) evaluate advances in technology currently (and soon to be) available that may improve voting; and (4) offer recommendations that provide a vision of voting that is easier, accessible, reliable, and verifiable. The committee will issue a report at the conc more »
CLIENT: Committee on the Future of Voting of the National Academies of Sciences. The Committee on the Future of Voting is seeking Practicum research support for an exhaustive study of technology, standards, and resources for voting technologies, including challenges related to the 2016 election. As described on the website for National Academies of Science, Engineering, & Medicine, this "ad hoc committee, under the auspices of the Committee on Science, Technology and Law and the Computer Science and Telecommunications Board, will conduct a study that will: (1) document the current state of play in terms of technology, standards, and resources for voting technologies; (2) examine challenges arising out of the 2016 federal election; (3) evaluate advances in technology currently (and soon to be) available that may improve voting; and (4) offer recommendations that provide a vision of voting that is easier, accessible, reliable, and verifiable. The committee will issue a report at the conclusion of the study." Students in this Practicum will summarize the available literature and government reports on the state of voting technology and develop a bibliography to aid the Committee. The Practicum seeks to build a graduate team of students from law, computer science, and political science to examine issues specific to their academic areas. Students will meet regularly with Professor Persily one on one or in small teams, depending on the project. Additional information on the Committee can be found at the following link: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/stl/voting/index.htm. Students may enroll in any quarter and those seeking R credit may, with consent of the instructor, move from Section 1 (2 credits) to Section 2 (3 credits for R work), during the first week of the term. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Final Paper.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2-3 | Grading: Law Mandatory P/R/F
Instructors: Persily, N. (PI)

LAW 806C: Policy Practicum: Fake News and Misinformation

CLIENT: Hewlett Foundation Madison Initiative. This Practicum works closely with the Hewlett Foundation Madison Initiative on an exhaustive study of fake news, misinformation, disinformation and propaganda and their implications for democracy in America and around the world. The client, the Hewlett Foundation Madison Initiative, is developing a grant-making program for interventions in the spread of fake news and misinformation which also promote accurate information for a healthy, deliberative democracy. The Practicum builds on the work of a Spring 2017 Practicum, led by Senator Russ Feingold, which analyzed the roles of major online platforms -- Google, Facebook, Reddit, and Twitter -- in proliferating fake news and misinformation in the 2016 election. Students will contribute to that study with their own independent research focusing on such issues as self-regulation by the platforms, legal and regulatory frameworks, analysis of algorithms and user data, and other issues that arise more »
CLIENT: Hewlett Foundation Madison Initiative. This Practicum works closely with the Hewlett Foundation Madison Initiative on an exhaustive study of fake news, misinformation, disinformation and propaganda and their implications for democracy in America and around the world. The client, the Hewlett Foundation Madison Initiative, is developing a grant-making program for interventions in the spread of fake news and misinformation which also promote accurate information for a healthy, deliberative democracy. The Practicum builds on the work of a Spring 2017 Practicum, led by Senator Russ Feingold, which analyzed the roles of major online platforms -- Google, Facebook, Reddit, and Twitter -- in proliferating fake news and misinformation in the 2016 election. Students will contribute to that study with their own independent research focusing on such issues as self-regulation by the platforms, legal and regulatory frameworks, analysis of algorithms and user data, and other issues that arise with current events or through ongoing research findings. Students will undertake literature reviews, legal case analysis, investigations of business practices and algorithms associated with the relevant platforms, surveys of the roles of foreign governments, and analysis of policy proposals to combat fake news, misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda. In addition to law, students in the fields of communications, computer science, journalism, political science, and public policy are especially welcome to join the research team. Students will meet one on one with Professor Persily to frame their research and discuss their findings. Students may enroll in any quarter. Those law students seeking R credit may, with consent of the instructor, move from section 1 to section 2. Section 1 is open enrollment for any law or graduate student. Undergraduates may, in exceptional cases, be admitted to the Practicum with consent of the instructor. Elements used in grading: Class participation, Final Paper. NOTES: Students may not count more than a combined total of eight units of directed research projects and policy lab practica toward graduation unless the additional counted units are approved in advance by the Petitions Committee. Such approval will be granted only for good cause shown. Even in the case of a successful petition for additional units, a student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Directed Writing, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. For detailed information, see "Directed Research/Policy Labs" in the SLS Student Handbook.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2-3 | Grading: Law Mandatory P/R/F
Instructors: Persily, N. (PI)

LAW 881: Externship Companion Seminar

(Formerly Law 472) The practice of public interest law -- whether in the criminal or civil context, or a government or non-profit setting -- requires an attorney to consider a host of issues distinct from one in private practice. How should decisions be made about priorities with limited resources? Where an organization has a broad social justice mission, where does litigation on behalf of individual clients or a group of clients fit in? Prior to initiating litigation or advancing a defense, what quantum of evidence should an attorney require? What role, if any, should an attorney's personal beliefs play in a course of representation? Through directed supervision of their externships, as well as participation in weekly seminars, students will evaluate such questions in the context of their practical experience. Students are required to write weekly reflection papers of 2 to 3 pages. Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation, weekly reflection papers and final reflection paper.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2 | Grading: Law Mandatory P/R/F
Instructors: Winn, M. (PI)
Filter Results:
term offered
updating results...
number of units
updating results...
time offered
updating results...
days
updating results...
UG Requirements (GERs)
updating results...
component
updating results...
career
updating results...
© Stanford University | Terms of Use | Copyright Complaints