FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3126047788> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3126047788 endingPage "1152" @default.
• W3126047788 startingPage "1091" @default.
• W3126047788 abstract "B RAY IN P RINTER (F LIP ) (D O N OT D ELETE ) 1/27/2014 10:48 AM THE MYTH OF THE MILD DECLARATORY JUDGMENT S AMUEL L. B RAY † A BSTRACT When plaintiffs want prospective relief, they usually request an injunction, a declaratory judgment, or both. The fact that plaintiffs often choose between these remedies, or seek them together, raises an obvious question: How are they different? The standard answer is that the declaratory judgment is milder and the injunction is stronger. This mildness thesis has been endorsed by the Supreme Court, the Restatement (Second) of Judgments, and many legal scholars. Three rationales have been given for why the declaratory judgment is milder, each focused on something the declaratory judgment is said to lack: a command to the parties, a sanction for disobedience, and full issue-preclusive effect. This Article critiques the rationales for the mildness thesis, demonstrating that they cannot be squared with the way the declaratory judgment and the injunction are actually used. This Article also offers an alternative account of the choice between these remedies. In many contexts they are substitutes, but not always perfect substitutes. This Article therefore explores the conditions under which each remedy has a comparative advantage when used prospectively. Central to this account is judicial management. The injunction has—and the declaratory judgment lacks—a number of features that allow a court to effectively manage the parties. There is also a difference in timing, because the declaratory judgment is sometimes available at an earlier stage of a dispute. This account clarifies the choice between these remedies, and it has implications for the doctrine of ripeness. Copyright © 2014 Samuel L. Bray. † Assistant Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law. Thanks for helpful comments are due to Stuart Banner, Will Baude, Marc DeGirolami, John Golden, Robert Goldstein, Ranjit Hakim, Rick Hasen, Allison Hoffman, Bert Huang, Maximo Langer, Doug Laycock, Jerry Lopez, Dan Markel, Steve Munzer, Grant Nelson, Doug Rendleman, Bertrall Ross, Joanna Schwartz, Tracy Thomas, Jon Varat, Eugene Volokh, Kevin Walsh, Howard Wasserman, Steve Yeazell, and participants in workshops at Florida State University, the University of Illinois, and UCLA. Thanks are also due to Hannah Dubina and Sarah Dubina for excellent research assistance." @default.
• W3126047788 created "2021-02-01" @default.
• W3126047788 creator A5075701828 @default.
• W3126047788 date "2014-02-01" @default.
• W3126047788 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W3126047788 title "THE MYTH OF THE MILD DECLARATORY JUDGMENT" @default.
• W3126047788 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W3126047788 type Work @default.
• W3126047788 sameAs 3126047788 @default.
• W3126047788 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W3126047788 countsByYear W31260477882019 @default.
• W3126047788 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3126047788 hasAuthorship W3126047788A5075701828 @default.
• W3126047788 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3126047788 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3126047788 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W3126047788 hasConcept C2778893106 @default.
• W3126047788 hasConcept C97460637 @default.
• W3126047788 hasConceptScore W3126047788C17744445 @default.
• W3126047788 hasConceptScore W3126047788C199539241 @default.
• W3126047788 hasConceptScore W3126047788C2778272461 @default.
• W3126047788 hasConceptScore W3126047788C2778893106 @default.
• W3126047788 hasConceptScore W3126047788C97460637 @default.
• W3126047788 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W3126047788 hasLocation W31260477881 @default.
• W3126047788 hasOpenAccess W3126047788 @default.
• W3126047788 hasPrimaryLocation W31260477881 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W1135563127 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W115177501 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W13758951 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W1487892008 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W1493293802 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W1495593927 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W1504979912 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W1581485736 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W1602908173 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W1664361736 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W1777436654 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W1850483567 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W1857435855 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W1987155948 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W2003654163 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W258737758 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W579989616 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W607040064 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W627467185 @default.
• W3126047788 hasRelatedWork W643615177 @default.
• W3126047788 hasVolume "63" @default.
• W3126047788 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3126047788 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3126047788 magId "3126047788" @default.
• W3126047788 workType "article" @default.