**Please expect a new website soon!**
The Wisconsin Law Review is pleased to announce its latest additions to WLR Online:
In January 2014, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit became the fifth circuit court to hold that a habeas corpus procedural rule — exhaustion — bars habeas petitioners from advancing all cumulative error arguments when they failed to raise cumulative error in their state court proceedings. Only one circuit — the Fifth Circuit — allows petitioners to raise cumulative error for the first time in his or her habeas appeal. This Essay argues that the plurality has erred.
Brian J. Levy received his J.D. from New York University School of Law.
This essay briefly summarizes problems for the bankruptcy system created by the Supreme Court's controversial opinion in Stern v. Marshall, and five ways in which its recent opinion in In re Bellingham failed to fix them.
Jonathan C. Lipson is the Harold E. Kohn Professor of Law at Temple University, Beasley School of Law.
In Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc., the Supreme Court addressed the relationship between direct infringement under § 271(a) of the Patent Act and induced infringement under § 271(b). The Court held that a defendant could be liable for inducing infringement of a patented process only if a single party would have been liable for performing all of the steps constituting direct infringement. In this short article, I provide the background to the opinion, discuss the ruling, and offer four lessons.
Michael A. Carrier is a Distinguished Professor at Rutgers School of Law.