James R. McCall
Emeritus Faculty
Bio
Scholarship
Books
Ìý(Center for Creative Educational Services 2d ed. 1986).
Ìý(Center for Creative Education Services 1980).
The Burger Court and the Antitrust LawÌý(Continuing Education of the Bar 1978).
Consumer Protection LawÌý(Continuing Education of the Bar 1977).
Ìý(West Publishing Co. 1977 & Stat. Supp.).
Journal Articles
Minnesota v. Philip Morris, Inc.:ÌýAn Important Legal Ethics Message Which Neglects the Public Interest in Product Safety Research, 87ÌýKy. L.J.Ìý1127 (1999) (with Edward J. Imwinkelried).Ìý
A Basic Concern for Process: CommentaryÌýon Quo Vadis, Prospective Overruling, 50ÌýHastings L.J.Ìý805 (1999).Ìý
Comment on Professor Roth’s Reply, 21ÌýU. Haw. L. Rev.Ìý531 (1999).Ìý
Endangering Individual Autonomy in Choice of Lawyers and Trustees—Misconceived Conflict of Interest Claims in the Kamehameha Schools Bishop Estate Litigation, 21ÌýU. Haw. L. Rev.Ìý487 (1999).Ìý
The Personhood Argument Against Polygraph Evidence, Or “Even If the Polygraph Really Works, Will Courts Admit the Results?”, 49ÌýHastings L.J.Ìý925 (1998).Ìý
Dan F. Henke—Quiet, Competent, and Indispensable, 48ÌýHastings L.J.Ìý1087 (1997).Ìý
In Memoriam—Professor Rudolph B. Schlesinger, 20ÌýHastings Int’l & Comp. L. Rev.Ìý215 (1997).Ìý
Issues Once Moot: TheÌýOtherÌýEvidentiary Objections to the Admission of Exculpatory Polygraph Examinations, 32ÌýWake Forest L. Rev.Ìý1045 (1997) (with Edward J. Imwinkelried).Ìý
Private Enforcement of Predatory Price Laws Under the California Unlawful Practices Act and the Federal Antitrust Acts, 28ÌýPac. L.J.Ìý311 (1997).Ìý
Reconsideration of the “Pariah” Status of Polygraph Evidence, 5ÌýCriminal Practice L. Rev.Ìý1 (1997).
Thoughts about Roger Traynor and Learned Hand—A Qualifying Response to Professor Konefsky, 65ÌýU. Cin. L. Rev.Ìý1243 (1997).Ìý
Misconceptions and Reevaluation—Polygraph Admissibility afterÌýRockÌý²¹²Ô»åÌýDaubert, 1996ÌýU. Ill. L. Rev.Ìý363 (1996).Ìý
Greater Representation for California Consumers—Fluid Recovery, Consumer Trust Funds, and Representative Actions, 46ÌýHastings L.J.Ìý797 (1995) (with Patricia Sturdevant, Laura Kaplan & Gail Hillebrand).Ìý
Consumer Protection Laws in Bulgaria, 5ÌýPace Int’l L. Rev.Ìý25 (1993) (with Lonel M. Allen, Vincent Brannigan, Janet Crosson, Bruce D. Ensor, Helen Jaffe, M. Stuart Madden, Elena Mola, James P. Nehf, Holly Polgase, Norbert Reich, David L. Scull & Robin Silverman).Ìý
The Chicago School of Analysis in American Antitrust Law: A Historical Perspective and Review of Developments During the Bush Administration, 9ÌýNihon Univ. Comp. L.Ìý107 (1992).
Truth in Evidence and the Privilege Clause—A Compromised Relationship, 23ÌýPac. L.J.Ìý1061 (1992).Ìý
The Corporation as Client: Problems, Perspectives, and Partial Solutions, 39ÌýHastings L.J.Ìý623 (1988).Ìý
The Disaggregation of Damages Requirement in Private Monopolization Actions, 62ÌýNotre Dame L. Rev.Ìý643 (1987).Ìý
Nix v. Whiteside:ÌýThe Lawyer’s Role In Response to Perjury, 13ÌýHastings Const. L.Q.Ìý443 (1986).Ìý
Professor William J. Riegger—A Man Who Had a Gift with People, 10ÌýHastings Int’l & Comp. L. Rev.Ìý5 (1986).Ìý
Roger Traynor: Teacher, Jurist, and Friend, 35ÌýHastings L.J.Ìý741 (1984).Ìý
Agreements to Fix or Affect Prices Under the American Antitrust Laws, ___ÌýNihon Univ. L. Rev.Ìý___ (1982) (in Japanese).
The Prohibitions and Enforcement of the American Antitrust Laws, ___ÌýNihon Univ. L. Rev.Ìý___ (1982) (in Japanese).
Vertical Distribution Restraints After the G.T.E. Sylvania Decision, ___ÌýNihon Univ. L. Rev.Ìý___ (1982) (in Japanese).
Due Process and Consumer Protection: Concepts and Realities in Procedure and Substance—Class Action Issues, 25ÌýHastings L.J.Ìý1351 (1974).Ìý
Due Process and Consumer Protection: Concepts and Realities in Procedure and Substance—Repossession and Adhesion Contract Issues, 26ÌýHastings L.J.Ìý383 (1974).Ìý
The Past as Prologue: A History of the Right to Repossess, 47ÌýS. Cal. L. Rev.Ìý58 (1973).Ìý
Consumer Protection—A New Field for a New Day, 34ÌýATLA J.Ìý136 (1972).
Chapters In Books
Law Reform, Lawyers, and Access to Justice, inÌýJapanese Business LawÌý39 (Gerald Paul McAlinn ed., Kluwer Law Int’l 2007).Ìý
The Admission of Polygraph Evidence in American Courts—An Unappreciated Consequence ofÌýDaubert v. Merrell Dow, inÌýWorld Conference on New Trends in Criminal Investigation and EvidenceÌý143 (Nijboer & Reijntjes eds., 1997).
Commercial Transactions and Consumer Protection, inÌý1970 California Law Trends and DevelopmentsÌý443 (Bancroft-Whitney 1970).Ìý
Newspaper & Magazine Articles
School’s Modern Era is Marked by Growth,ÌýL.A. Daily J., Mar. 5, 1993, at S18.Ìý