Michelle Mickey Grant is a rising star in a prestigious Texas law firm. Unfortunately, her career goals firm came with a heavy pricethe demise of her marriage to Tyler Grant, who now holds primary custody of their teenager, Reagan. As the holidays approach, Mickey focuses on winning the next case without any idea that her world is about to shatter. Someone is abducting teenage girls from local mall parking lots and leaving few clues as to their whereabouts. After Reagan goes missing, on Mickeys watch, just days before Christmas, a suspect is arrested and convicted for the capital murder of one such abductee. Following the trial, the police all but close their files on the open cases of the other abductees. Mickey is haunted by lingering questions, with only one potential source for the truthdeath row inmate Willie Lee FlynnMickey tries and fails to gain his cooperation, leaving her to rely on her legal resources and the court system to exert pressure on him. As she does Mickey is thrust into a series of treacherous events, leading her down a dangerous path that she hopes finally points to the truth, no matter the threat to her career and her own safety. In this legal thriller, a determined attorney inserts herself in the most important case of her life in an attempt to learn what became of her daughter when she disappeared outside a Texas mall.

Previous edition, 2004, had subtitle : How to be a good friend of the court ; first edition, 1998, has subtitle : How to write it and use it effectively.

Since 2013, an organization called the Nonhuman Rights Project has brought before the New York State courts an unusual request—asking for habeas corpus hearings to determine whether Kiko and Tommy, two captive chimpanzees, should be considered legal persons with the fundamental right to bodily liberty. While the courts have agreed that chimpanzees share emotional, behavioural, and cognitive similarities with humans, they have denied that chimpanzees are persons on superficial and sometimes conflicting grounds. Consequently, Kiko and Tommy remain confined as legal "things" with no rights. The major moral and legal question remains unanswered: are chimpanzees mere "things", as the law currently sees them, or can they be "persons" possessing fundamental rights? In Chimpanzee Rights: The Philosophers’ Brief, a group of renowned philosophers considers these questions. Carefully and clearly, they examine the four lines of reasoning the courts have used to deny chimpanzee personhood: species, contract, community, and capacities. None of these, they argue, merits disqualifying chimpanzees from personhood. The authors conclude that when judges face the choice between seeing Kiko and Tommy as things and seeing them as persons—the only options under current law—they should conclude that Kiko and Tommy are persons who should therefore be protected from unlawful confinement "in keeping with the best philosophical standards of rational judgment and ethical standards of justice." Chimpanzee Rights: The Philosophers’ Brief—an extended version of the amicus brief submitted to the New York Court of Appeals in Kiko’s and Tommy’s cases—goes to the heart of fundamental issues concerning animal rights, personhood, and the question of human and nonhuman nature. It is essential reading for anyone interested in these issues.

The U.S. Supreme Court is a public policy battleground in which organized interests attempt to etch their economic, legal, and political preferences into law through the filing of amicus curiae ("friend of the court") briefs. In Friends of the Supreme Court: Interest Groups and Judicial Decision Making, Paul M. Collins, Jr. explores how organized interests influence the justices' decision making, including how the justices vote and whether they choose to author concurrences and dissents. Collins presents theories of judicial choice derived from disciplines as diverse as law, marketing, political science, and social psychology. This theoretically rich and empirically rigorous treatment of decision-making on the nation's highest court, which represents the most comprehensive examination ever undertaken of the influence of U.S. Supreme Court amicus briefs, provides clear evidence that interest groups play a significant role in shaping the justices' choices.

"Amicus curiae participation in international courts and investment arbitration tribunals is increasing despite lack of clarity on the concept's nature, function and added value in international dispute settlement. The book examines the laws and practices of amicus curiae to assess the concept's status quo, and to determine if it meets the many expectations. Does it infuse proceedings with alternative views and the public interest? Does it increase the legitimacy and transparency of international dispute settlement, or the coherence of international law? Or does it derail the proceedings at the expense of the parties to advance its agenda? The book argues that neither the expectations nor the concerns attached to amicus curiae have materialized. It shows a hesitation by courts with a strong adversarial tradition to consider the views of non-parties, and argues that amicus curiae is not the best vehicle to present a public interest or increase legitimacy. However, it can improve judicial decisions and decision-making if regulated and used properly."--

This incisive publication provides guidance on writing and understanding amicus briefs, with practical suggestions on all aspects of the amicus practice.

First edition, 1998, had subtitle : How to write it and use it effectively.