Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Daniel Givelber is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Daniel Givelber.


University of Pennsylvania Law Review | 1975

Treating Blacks As If They Were White: Problems of Definition and Proof in Section 1982 Cases

Judith Olans Brown; Daniel Givelber; Stephen Subrin

Immediately after the Civil War, the United States Congress enacted, over presidential veto, a statute popularly known as the 1866 Civil Rights Act. In 1870 that statute was reenacted, and a major part is presently codified as sections 1981 and 1982 of title 42 of the United States Code. Those sections lay virtually moribund for a hundred years, until they were reviewed in 1968 as a judicial contribution to the mid-twentieth century civil rights movement. Passed in the wake of Union victory, the 1866 Civil Rights Act represented an attempt by the victors to crystallize the metaphysics of emancipation into the perquisites of citizenship and to give “real content to the freedom guaranteed by the Thirteenth Amendment.” The language of section 1982 is deceptively simple: “All citizens of the United States shall have the same right, in every State and Territory, as is enjoyed by white citizens thereof to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property. Since 1968 there has been considerable litigation under this statute, but little appreciation of the ambiguity of the words “same right … as is enjoyed by white citizens.” Decisions tend to discuss the evidence presented in great detail without relating that evidence to a carefully drawn definition of the statutory language and the elements of the prima facie case which that definition should supply. Until we know what the plaintiff must prove, however, evidentiary analysis lacks direction, and until we know what the statutory language means, there will be no consistent approach to what the plaintiff must prove. In this Article we shall attempt to define the words “same right … as is enjoyed by white citizens,” to set forth the elements of the prima facie case derived therefrom, and to consider what evidence, inferences, and presumptions would permit a plaintiff to establish those elements. Our inquiry is pertinent not only to section 1982 cases: Section 1981 contains parallel language with respect to contract actions, and Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (as well as several state and local statutes) is directed to similar ends. Therefore, while our definition of the “same right” language is most relevant to sections 1982 and 1981, our discussion of evidentiary considerations is also applicable to civil rights litigation in general.


Wisconsin Law Review | 1984

Tarasoff, myth and reality: an empirical study of private law in action.

Daniel Givelber; William J. Bowers; C. L. Blitch


American Journal of Public Health | 2015

Tobacco Industry Use of Personal Responsibility Rhetoric in Public Relations and Litigation: Disguising Freedom to Blame as Freedom of Choice

Lissy C. Friedman; Andrew Cheyne; Daniel Givelber; Mark A. Gottlieb; Richard A. Daynard


Archive | 1997

Meaningless Acquittals, Meaningful Convictions: Do We Reliably Acquit the Innocent?

Daniel Givelber


Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology | 2010

Liberation Reconsidered: Understanding Why Judges and Juries Disagree about Guilt

Amy Farrell; Daniel Givelber


Journal of Legal Education | 1995

Learning Through Work: An Empirical Study of Legal Internship

Daniel Givelber; Brook K. Baker; John McDevitt; Robyn Miliano


American Criminal Law Review | 2005

Lost Innocence: Speculation and Data about the Acquitted

Daniel Givelber


Law and Social Inquiry-journal of The American Bar Foundation | 2008

Judges and Juries: The Defense Case and Differences in Acquittal Rates

Daniel Givelber; Amy Farrell


American Journal of Public Health | 2006

Junking Good Science: Undoing Daubert v Merrill Dow Through Cross-Examination and Argument

Daniel Givelber; Lori Strickler


American Criminal Law Review | 2001

Punishing Protestations of Innocence: Denying Responsibility and Its Consequences

Daniel Givelber

Collaboration


Dive into the Daniel Givelber's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Amy Farrell

Northeastern University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Andrew Cheyne

University of California

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge