*John Osborne I. Introduction A 2024 Supreme Court decision in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P. sent shockwaves through the bankruptcy law community and the vast network of opioid crisis victims.[1] The Supreme Court heard Harrington to decide one important issue: whether the Bankruptcy Code authorizes a court to issue an order “extinguishing vast numbers ofContinue reading “A Broken Shield or a Double-Edged Sword?: The Fall of Nonconsensual Third-Party Releases”
Author Archives: University of Baltimore Law Review Staff
Gold Medals & Tainted Burgers: The Dope on Olympic Doping
*Alex Robinson I. Introduction The 2024 Summer Olympics performance may be firmly in the public’s rearview mirror, but the United States is not done with tension-filled showdowns on the international stage.[1] The 2021 and 2024 Summer Olympics featured dozens of Chinese swimmers who tested positive for banned substances but were ultimately cleared to compete byContinue reading “Gold Medals & Tainted Burgers: The Dope on Olympic Doping”
Disability Accommodations: Only Workin’ 9–5?
*Melissa Bosley The Americans with Disabilities Act requires that employers make “reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified individual.”[1] At times, qualified individuals with disabilities may find physically commuting to the job site difficult. For example, an employee with a vision-distorting condition may require magnifying equipment to successfully completeContinue reading “Disability Accommodations: Only Workin’ 9–5?”
What the Memphis Seven Decision Means for Starbucks Workers
*Violet Sovine Starbucks Workers United[1] and the Starbucks Corporation announced in February 2024 that they would hold collective bargaining sessions after failing to begin negotiations for a little over three years.[2] Starbucks has previously shown extreme hostility to the unionization of its stores, causing Starbucks Workers United to file 700 unfair labor practice (ULP) chargesContinue reading “What the Memphis Seven Decision Means for Starbucks Workers”
Bones of Contention: Reassessing Consumer Expectations in Food Liability Cases
*Shekinah Tony-Oyeleye I. Introduction A recent Ohio Supreme Court decision threatens to upend the landscape of food liability law.[1] The court’s ruling, that a restaurant was not negligent for serving a bone in a “boneless” chicken wing, highlights the tension between consumer expectations and the realities of food preparation and service.[2] The ruling raises crucialContinue reading “Bones of Contention: Reassessing Consumer Expectations in Food Liability Cases”
University of Baltimore Law Review 