Third-year Law Students Research Articles

Darkness and near work: Myopia and its progression in third-year law students

Purpose To evaluate myopia prevalence, myopia progression, and various potential myopia risk factors in third-year law students. Design Cross-sectional study and survey. Participants One hundred seventy-nine third-year law students at the University of Pennsylvania. Methods We administered a questionnaire to assess the prevalence of myopia, myopia progression, and risk factors, including near work, family history, and daily light/dark exposure. We conducted a screening eye examination to ascertain myopia status. Myopia was defined as the mean spherical equivalent of the two eyes of ≤−0.5 diopters; myopia progression was defined by the self-reported need for a stronger eyeglass prescription during law school. Main outcome measures (1) prevalence of myopia, (2) progression of myopia. Results Seventy-nine percent of the class participated (n = 179, two were excluded for amblyopia leaving 177 students). Fifty-eight percent were male, 75% were Caucasian, and the mean age was 27 years. Seventy-nine percent reported parental myopia. The mean amount of near work was 7.4 hours/day; mean sleep was 7.9 hours/day; mean darkness was 5.3 hours/day. Sixty-six percent of the students were myopic. Of 96 participants myopic before law school, myopia increased in 83 (86%) during law school. Among 75 students not myopic at the beginning of law school, 14 (19%) became myopic. The onset of myopia could not be determined for 6 patients. There were trends for higher myopia prevalence among those with a parental myopia history ( P = 0.14) and for increased myopia progression among those reporting more daily near work ( P = 0.18). Students with ≤5.6 hours of daily darkness were more likely to report myopia progression than those with >5.6 hours of darkness per day (95% vs. 80%, P = 0.07). To account for possible confounding effects of risk factors with myopia progression, logistic regression with categorization of the continuous exposure variables (hours of near work, sleep, and darkness) above or below median values weakened the near work association (odds ratio 1.8, 95% confidence interval 0.5–6.7, P = 0.35) but continued to identify darkness association with daily hours of darkness (odds ratio 4.8, 95% confidence interval 1.0 ≥ 23.3, P < 0.05). Among the 77 students with myopia onset before college, those with ≤5.6 hours of daily darkness were more likely to progress than those with more hours of daily darkness (97% vs. 76%, P = 0.01). Conclusions This study confirms high rates of myopia prevalence and myopia progression among law students. The strongest association, especially in those with myopia onset before college, was a relation of myopia progression during law school with less daily exposure to darkness, a potential risk factor previously identified in childhood myopia. The role of exposure to darkness in refractive development warrants additional study.

MEDIATION TRENDS

MEDIATION TRENDS

An Experimental Investigation of the Efficacy of Lawyers' Letters

This experimental study investigates the efficacy of lawyers' letters in providing auditors with corroborating evidence about litigation contingencies. Fifty second- and third-year law students indicate their willingness to provide auditors with estimates of the likelihoods of unfavorable outcomes and potential damages for two realistic litigation cases. The findings indicate that (1) the potential loss of attorney-client privilege and (2) likelihoods of unfavorable litigation outcomes that approach auditors' lower bound for accrual both may inhibit lawyers' responses to auditors. Overall, these findings raise doubts about the efficacy of this widely utilized auditing procedure and lead to concerns about whether litigation contingencies and corresponding losses may be underreported in financial statements.

Copyright and technology innovation in higher education

Future Practical Management of Information Ethics Problems articles will focus upon intellectual property issues. This is an area where the boundary between the legal and ethical domains is both indistinct and rapidly changing. I am inviting legal experts to comment upon areas that are particularly relevant to higher education. Susan Ferencz Stager, former Director of Planning and Policy for Information Technology at Indiana University and current third-year Law student, provides insight into the tension between property protection and innovation in the following article. Her closing sentence should be taken as fair warning of a major ethical-legal issue your appropriate use policy needs to address.

In Praise of Jack B. Weinstein

Twenty-five years ago, when Jack Weinstein was in the early bloom of his judgeship and I was a third-year law student yet to step into a courtroom, I had my first encounter with this remarkable man. The occasion was a clerkship interview. Today's clerkship aspirants, skilled in computer-assisted research, immerse themselves in the judge's opinions before an interview. This method of preparation, of course, was unavailable to me, and, to be frank, I did not even think of it. Instead, on the train from New Haven, I silently rehearsed how I would tell the judge that I wanted to clerk on the district court because, after three years of case analysis and Socratic dialogue, I wanted action. Judge Weinstein had already earned a reputation as an inspired jurist who pursued an activist course that kept him and the Second Circuit hopping. I knew this was for me. I was particularly nervous about my meeting with Judge Weinstein; not only was his clerkship hot, but rumor had it that he only hired Columbia graduates. My anxieties proved short-lived. Although physically imposing, the judge was not intimidating in the slightest. He was interested in my graduate studies. He was interested in my teaching career before law school. He was interested in my activities. He was interested in my law review note. I finally caught on. He was interested in everything! Jack Weinstein's considerable intellectual and personal curiosity amazes me still.

Rules for Declining to Exercise Jurisdiction in Civil and Commercial Matters: Forum Non Conveniens, Lis Pendens

Rules for Declining to Exercise Jurisdiction in Civil and Commercial Matters: Forum Non Conveniens, Lis Pendens Get access Louis F. Del Duca, Louis F. Del Duca 1Louis F. Del Duca is Associate Dean and Professor of Law, The Dickinson School of Law; B.A., Temple, J.D., Harvard; Dott. di Giur., University of Rome Law School. The research assistance of Elizabeth T. Dold, third-year law student at The Dickinson School of Law, is greatly appreciated. Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar George A. Zaphiriou George A. Zaphiriou 2George A. Zaphiriou is Professor of Law and International Transactions, George Mason University School of Law and International Institute. Law Degree, University of Athens, LL.M. University of London. This is to acknowledge with thanks the help of my research assistant, Anne-Marie L. Kagy, a third-year student at the George Mason University School of Law. Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The American Journal of Comparative Law, Volume 42, Issue suppl_1, 1 December 1994, Pages 245–273, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/42.suppl1.245 Published: 01 December 1994

The Psychotherapist's Duty to Warn or Protect

In 1982 in Los Angeles, Dr Anderson was sued by Mrs Handler, the wife of his patient (Mr Handler), who had caused her a severe burn injury by setting their house on fire. Dr Anderson was also sued by both Mrs Caspe, a neighbor who claimed that she suffered emotional trauma in experiencing the incident, and by the landlord of the house for the property damage that was done. At the time of the incident, Dr Anderson had already been sued by Mr Handler himself because the good doctor warned the patient's wife on two previous occasions of his potential dangerousness, thus violating doctor/ patient confidentiality. In 1987 Dr Anderson quit practicing medicine; he is now a third-year law student at UCLA. In reflecting on the subject, he thinks that the doctor (in this case himself, of course) should also have been sued by the husband of the neighbor, Mr

An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Some Curriculum Innovations in Law Schools

This article reports the results of an evaluation of the effectiveness of curriculum innovations on third-year law students in four law schools over a three-year period. Each "program" school was matched to a nonprogram school. Students' attitudes in "program" and "control" schools were compared along such dimensions as legal ethics, professional activities, relations with clients, and more general personality measures, before and after exposure to a clinical program. Each program lasted the academic year. A standard questionnaire was administered to students in the program and control schools. The major goal of the clinical programs was to enhance the students' sense of professional responsibility so that when they entered legal practice their behavior would be more in keeping with the standards of their profession. The results of the evaluation were disappointing. The responses of the students exposed to the clinical programs did not show any significant shift in a more professionally responsible direction. Like the control students, the attitudes of the program students changed hardly at all between the first and second surveys. Exposure to clinical programs did not significantly alter students' attitudes toward professional ethics or professional behavior.