There’s No Place Like Work: How Modern Technology Is Changing the Judiciary’s Approach to Work-at-Home Arrangements as an ADA Accommodation

Benjamin D. Johnson *

In 1973, Jack Nilles, a researcher with the University of Southern California, coined the term “teleworking.”[1] His idea was to create a more flexible communication system for employees, reduce the need for transportation, and ultimately decentralize the traditional workplace.[2] Six years later, Marvin Minsky, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (“MIT”), first used the term “telepresence.”[3] Minsky sought to create a phenomenon whereby people could use technology to replicate their presence in an environment where they were not physically present.[4]

Continue reading.


* J.D. Candidate, 2016, University of Richmond School of Law. A.B., 2012, University of Georgia. I would like to thank the University of Richmond Law Review editorial staff for their diligent work that made this article possible. I would also like to thank my parents and my sister who each helped to instill in me a love for writing and are a constant source of encouragement in all of my pursuits. Finally, I would like to thank my wife, Sarah, whose unwavering love and support keeps me motivated daily.

        [1].    Biography of Jack Nilles, JALA Int’l, (last modified Sept. 26, 2011).

        [2].    See Jennifer Mears, Father of Telecommuting Jack Nilles Says Security, Managing Remote Workers Remain Big Hurdles, Network World (May 15, 2007, 1:00 AM),–managing-remote-workers-remain-big-hurd.html (quoting Jack Nilles’ initial thoughts about telecommuting and his perceptions on how his ideas contrasted with those of the “business world”).

        [3].    Wijnand A. IJsselsteijn, History of Telepresence, in 3D Videocommunication: Algorithms, Concepts, and Real-Time Systems in Human Centred Communication 7, 7 (Oliver Schreer, Peter Kauff & Thomas Sikora eds., 2005).

        [4].    See id. (“[Telepresence] refers to the phenomenon that a human operator develops a sense of being physically present at a remote location through interaction with the system’s human interface, that is, through the user’s actions and the subsequent perceptual feedback he/she receives via the appropriate teleoperation technology.”).


What’s Worse, Nuclear Waste of the United States’ Failed Policy for Its Disposal?

Christopher M. Keegan *

The United States of America is a nuclear nation. Despite individuals and organizations opposed to nuclear energy,[1] the reality is that nuclear power is an integral part of our nation and world.[2] In the United States specifically, nuclear power plays a vital role. Just less than 20% of the electricity produced in the United States comes from nuclear power.[3] Sixty-one commercial nuclear power plants currently operate in thirty states.[4] Furthermore, nuclear power is the most abundant clean energy source, accounting for roughly 60% of the non-fossil fuel electricity generated in the United States.[5] Additionally, the United States Navy is built around nuclear energy. As of 2009, approximately 45% of the Navy’s ships were nuclear powered, with 103 reactors powering eleven aircraft carriers and seventy-one submarines.[6]

Continue reading.


*  J.D. Candidate, 2016, University of Richmond School of Law. M.E.M., 2013, Old Dominion University; B.S., 2007, United States Naval Academy. I must express my extreme gratitude to Casey, for years of listening to me talk about nuclear power.  Thank you also to the University of Richmond Law Review’s editors and staff whose tireless and thankless work has made this comment possible.

        [1].    See generally Karl S. Coplan, The Externalities of Nuclear Power: First, Assume We Have a Can Opener . . . , 35 Ecology L. Currents 17 (2008) (arguing that the benefits of nuclear power are not worth the long term impacts of nuclear energy production).

        [2].    See Alex Funk & Benjamin K. Sovacool, Wasted Opportunities: Resolving the Impasse in United States Nuclear Waste Policy, 34 Energy L.J. 113, 114 (2013) (stating that nuclear power accounts for 13.5% of the world’s electricity).

        [3].    Nuclear Explained, U.S. Energy Info. Admin., ed/index.cfm?page=nuclear_home#tab2 (last updated Sept. 8, 2014).

        [4].    How Many Nuclear Power Plants Are in the United States, and Where Are They Located?, Frequently Asked Questions, U.S. Energy Info. Admin., tools/faqs/faq/cfm?id=207&t=3 (last updated Jan. 22, 2015); see also Nuclear Power in the USA, World Nuclear Ass’n, ries-T-Z/USA-Nuclear–Power/ (last updated Feb. 2015).

        [5].    See What Is U.S. Electricity Generation by Energy Source?, U.S. Energy Info. Admin., (last updated June 13, 2014) (stating that 67% of electricity in the United States is generated by fossil fuels and 19% by nuclear; therefore, nuclear energy accounts for 57% of the remaining 33% of energy not generated by fossil fuels).

        [6].    U.S. Dep’t of Energy & U.S. Dep’t of the Navy, The United States Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program 1 (2009).


Richard Prince, Author of The Catcher in the Rye: Transforming Fair Use Analysis

Brockenbrough A. Lamb *

One day in the fall of 2011, a man unrolled a blanket on a sidewalk by Central Park, laid out multiple copies of a book, and started selling them for forty dollars apiece.[1] The man was the notorious appropriation artist Richard Prince, and the books for sale were near-duplicates of an early edition of The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger.[2] They were “near-duplicates” for one very obvious reason: on the dustcover, title page, and copyright page, Prince’s name appeared in place of Salinger’s.[3] As it turns out, these books were part of Prince’s latest art project—500 meticulously constructed copies of The Catcher in the Rye using thick, high quality paper meant to mimic the 1951 original, the same cover art as the original, and most astonishingly, the same text as the original (in its entirety).[4]

Continue reading.


* J.D. Candidate, 2016, University of Richmond School of Law. B.A., 2000, Wake Forest University. I would like thank the authors Roland Barthes, Jorge Luis Borges, J.D. Salinger, and Richard Prince for their inestimable contributions to culture. I would also like to thank the staff and editors of the University of Richmond Law Review for their work on this comment. Finally, I am especially thankful for the support and encouragement of three loved ones, who happen to be attorneys: my wife, Elizabeth Anne Ridler Lamb; my father, Robert Henley Lamb; and my sister Hampton Breckinridge Lamb.

        [1].    See Kenneth Goldsmith, Richard Prince’s Latest Act of Appropriation: The Catcher in the Rye, Poetry Found. (Apr. 19, 2012), 2012/04/richard-princes-latest-act-of-appropriation-the-catcher-in-the-rye/.

        [2].    Several articles have referred to the Richard Prince versions as duplicates of the first edition (and not only an early edition) of The Catcher in the Rye by J. D. Salinger. See, e.g., id.; Thomas Hawk, Richard Prince on Appropriating “The Catcher in the Rye”, Thomas Hawk’s Digital Connection (June 17, 2013, 12:59 PM), http://thomashawk. com/2013/06/richard-prince-on-appropriating-the-catcher-in-the-rye.html. For a variety of bibliographic reasons this is incorrect. For instance, true first editions of The Catcher in the Rye had a photograph of J.D. Salinger on the rear panel of the dust jacket. First Edition Criteria and Points to Identify The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger,, (last visited Apr. 3, 2015). In later printings this feature was dropped. Michael Lieberman, Richard Prince: Book Pirate?, Book Patrol (Apr. 23, 2012), The Prince copies have a blank rear panel. See id. (noting that Prince’s version used the second issue dust jacket which lacks J.D. Salinger’s photo).

        [3].    Goldsmith, supra note 1.

        [4].    See Hawk, supra note 2.


A Corporation’s Securities Litigation Gambit: Fee-Shifting Provisions That Defend Against Fraud-on-the-Market

Steven W. Lippman *

A major issue in today’s corporate landscape is the growth of shareholder litigation. The typical types of claims brought by shareholders are derivative claims and class action claims. Specifically, derivative claims aimed at merger transactions were filed in over 90% of corporate mergers and acquisitions valued at $100 million since 2010.[1] As for securities class action claims—the topic of this comment—there have been an average of 191 filings per year since 1997.[2] Of the 166 securities class action claims in 2013, 84% involved Rule 10b-5 claims.[3] Claims alleging a violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 contend that the company made fraudulent misstatements or omissions that violate federal securities laws.[4] The ability to bring class action suits has its foundation in both statutory regimes and common law principles.[5]

Continue reading.


* J.D. Candidate 2016, University of Richmond School of Law. B.B.A., 2012, James Madison University. I am forever grateful for the love and support from my parents and my grandmother, Irene Lippman. I would like to thank the editors and staff of the University of Richmond Law Review for their hard work in making this publication possible.

        [1].    Lisa A. Rickard, Delaware Flirts with Encouraging Shareholder Lawsuits, Wall St. J. (Nov. 14, 2014), aging-shareholder-lawsuits-1416005328.

        [2].    Cornerstone Research, Securities Class Action Filings—2013 Year in Review 1 (2014), available at While there has been a decline in the number of filings in recent years, there was an increase in the number of filings from 2012 to 2013. Id.

        [3].    Id. at 1, 7.

        [4].    15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) (2012).

        [5].    Class Action: An Overview, Legal Info. Inst., class_action (last visited Apr. 3, 2015).