Former UC-Berkeley law professor Goodwin Liu brought a reputation as a legal scholar to the California Supreme Court last fall, but so far he’s shunned one of academia’s most notorious trappings. His first three majority opinions, issued in late April and early May, did not contain a single footnote, drawing cheers from some appellate lawyers.
On the bench, though, Liu fully embraces another familiar element of legal pedagogy: the hypothetical. Liu is one of the court’s most active questioners and exploring difficult variations on the fact pattern at issue is a favorite approach. At the other end of the bench, Justice Carol Corrigan doesn’t hesitate to rein in counsel who stray from the record of a case, so it can be a tricky dynamic for counsel to navigate.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
