- Online Edition
- Print Edition
- Donahue Lecture Series
- Archived Mastheads
Federal common law governs claims arising out of employee benefit plans covered by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). The Court of Appeals for the First Circuit created an approach for interpreting the ambiguous word “accident” in ERISA-governed plans in Wickman v. Northwestern National Insurance Co. In Stamp v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., the First Circuit used the Wickman framework to address, for the first time, whether the administrator of an ERISA-governed plan could reasonably conclude that the death of an insured party who was killed in a single-car accident when driving drunk was not accidental for purposes of his life insurance policies. The First Circuit reviewed the administrator’s decision under an arbitrary and capricious standard and upheld the decision as both reasonable and supported by the evidence on the record. . . .
The Central Artery/Tunnel project in Boston, Massachusetts, or “Big Dig” as it came to be known, was intended to reconnect Boston by breaking down barriers caused by a divisive, raised highway between the waterfront and downtown sections of the city. Instead, the project, which did place the highway beneath the city thereby creating acres of parkland, made Boston the poster child for public construction corruption. Reporters worked feverishly to discover time and financial problems with the Big Dig long before a woman lost her life in one of the project’s tunnels because of questionable construction methods. Using confidential, off-the-record, and nonconfidential sources alike to reveal massive cost overruns and multi-year delays, these reporters informed the public where their tax dollars were really going. Without such reporting it is quite possible that the vast scope of the problem would have never seen the light of day, or more likely would have been overshadowed by grand public ceremonies celebrating accomplishments without acknowledging that promises of cost and time were beyond broken. This caveat of protection by reporters may have been the only thing standing between disclosing insider knowledge on the factors causing delays and cost overruns and simply taking the safer route by remaining behind the scenes, not risking sources’ money, jobs, or worse, by speaking out publicly. . . .
This article examines the conflicting film narratives about the internment produced between 1942 and 2007. It argues that while later films, especially documentaries, counter early government film narratives justifying the internment, these counter-narratives have their own damaging hegemony. Whereas earlier commercial films tell the internment story through the eyes of sympathetic whites, using a conventional civil rights template found in films like Mississippi Burning and To Kill A Mockingbird, Japanese and other Asian American documentary filmmakers construct their Japanese characters as model minorities—hyper-citizens, super patriots. Further, the internment experience depicted in films remains largely a male story. With the exception of Emiko Omori’s documentary film memoir, Rabbit in the Moon, the stories and voices of Japanese-American women, who with their children comprised the bulk of internees, are marginalized.
Film is a potentially powerful educational tool, but this tool is only as effective as the stories it tells. Non-Asian filmmakers tend to use the internment era as a vehicle or backdrop for stories about white redemption. Asian American commercial filmmakers, perhaps in an attempt to capture white audiences, follow a similar pattern. Although Asian American documentarians do a better job of educating audiences about the internment era, even these filmmakers tend to emphasize the hyper-patriotism within the World War II Japanese-American community, an image also used by the redress and reparation movement of the 1970s and 1980s. Thus, I argue that the shadow of the internment experience affects Asian American documentarians’ telling of the internment story. These filmmakers engage in a degree of self-censorship, crafting their stories to show Japanese Americans as a model minority to counter persistent perceptions of Asian American as foreigners—marginal citizens whose loyalty is forever suspect. . . .
This Note will examine the costs and benefits that a distributed generation back-up customer imposes on the distribution system. Also, it will outline the arguments for and against including such costs and benefits in the standby rate structure. Thereafter, this Note will discuss the early development of standby rates. It will briefly state the federal requirements for standby rate structure and discuss a case following the enactment of such requirements. Further, this Note will explore the development and structure of standby rate policy in the leading state, California. Lastly, this Note will analyze the components of each policy and determine the most effective policy in accordance with cost causation. . . .