memo is due feb 7th at 12pm.
form and content (go general to specific):
heading
paragraph about the WARN Act, the good faith provision, and give the good faith quote.
then what?
intro. a paragraph that collects general information about the section that the court should know, including purpose of the good faith provision; explain how the exception is construed (narrow/broad); preponderance; two elements of the test (subj AND obj)
how does subj get satisfied? how does obj get satisfied?
then move to the specific information, including separation of the subjective and objective elements ("in legal writing, structure the writing around the structure of the rule itself");
subj: did they have a good faith intent to comply? obj: is it reasonable to think that the defendant thought it had complied with the act? if both elements are not met, the courts have not granted relief in the damages.
discretion. if both elements are met, then it is in the court's discretion to reduce damages. but by how much? is there a scale by which courts determine the reduction? is there any guidance in the case history or a scale for damage reduction?
standard of review. (3 part test: subjective, objective, discretion: saxion is part of the standard of review) the most useful and important part of the memo (i.e. what will separate good and average anaylsis) if the subj and obj are met, and the judge decides in discretion to/ not to reduce damages, what is the standard of review for the cases? is there a standard for each prong of the test?
closing. "in most published cases where the courts have considered this issue, the employer has/ has not been successful in showing good faith and the judge has/has not reduced damages." recap the highlights of the explanation, the main points to walk away with. is reduction more likely or less likely granted? what is the standard most frequently used?
law review articles
3 U. Pa. J. Lab. & Emp. L. 113 - Judicial Interpretation of the WARN Act Exceptions and Their Implications in the Health Care Industry (keep eyes open for legis history, and see if there's anything there that is helpful)
key cite and shepardize.
two reasons: 1) is this good law? (what happened in the case? how have other cases treated this case?) 2) references to other cases
in westlaw - go to 'keycite' and enter the citation you want to check.
in lexis - go to 'shepard's'... shepardizing gives a much more complete history
c.f.r. is to regulations as u.s.c. is to statutes
20 c.f.r. 639 is useful, but does not address the exception we are concerned with.
citations of subsequent history (ICW ex 10)
No comments:
Post a Comment