Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 10 P48 pot

increased the power of the Soviet Union, which gained control of Eastern Europe and part of Germany. Underlying Causes The circumstances that led to World War II began shortly after the end of WORLD WAR I in 1918. The TREATY OF VERSAILLES, which ended World War I placed blame on Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The treaty caused resentment in the German people towards the allies from the first war. The treaty required Germany to remain disarmed, which proved impossible to enforce. Moreover, the treaty required Germany to pay heavy rep arations for the war, and Germany had to permanently forfeit some of its land. The United States had insisted on the formation of the LEAGUE OF NATIONS, but the United States Senate refused to ratify the treaty that would have made the United States a part of the body. The League of Nations did not have an armed force, and when nations focused on self-interests as opposed to the interests of the members collectively, the League failed. The GREAT DEPRESSION that affected the United States also devastated Germany. The unemploy- ment rate in Germany reached 33 percent. Unemployment coupled with resentment to- wards the Treaty of Versailles and other circum- stances led to the rise in power of ADOLF HITLER in Germany. Hitler was the head of the National Socialist, or Nazi party, which he established during the early 1920s. The Nazi party grew in popularity with the civil unrest during the 1930s and Hitler became chancellor in 1933. Within months of his appointment, the Nazi party consolidated its power and Hitler assumed dictatorial rule. Japanese Empire As the Nazi party rose to power in Germany, Japanese militarism in the 1930s threatened peace in the Pacific. The Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931 signaled a new direction for Japan. Its military leaders, who dominated the government, sought to conquer large parts of Asia. In 1936 and 1937 Japan signed treaties with Germany and Italy (headed by dictator BENITO MUSSOLINI), creating what was called the Axis powers. In 1937 Japan began an undeclared war against China. When Japan occupied Indochina in 1940, the United States stopped exporting gasoline, iron, steel, and rubber to Japan and froze all Japanese assets in the United States. In the fall of 1941, the extremist Japanese general Hideki To ̄ jo ̄ became leader of the cabinet. His cabinet began planning a war with the United States as Japan realized it could not attain its imperial goals without defeating the United States. German Buildup and the Start of the War After taking power, Hitler broke the Versailles Treaty and proceeded with a massive buildup of the German armed forces. Hitler believed that the German people were a master race that needed more territory. His first aim was to reunite all Germans living under foreign governments. In 1936 he reclaimed the Rhine- land from French control and in 1938 annexed Austria to Germany. That same year he took over the German areas of Czechoslovakia and in 1939 annexed all of that country. Though France and Great Britain had acquiesced to Germany’s actions, they soon realized that Hitler had greater ambitions. When Germany invaded Poland on September 1, 1939, Great Britain and France declared war on Germany and World War II began. Poland was quickly defeated, and for a period of time a “phony war” ensued, with neither side making any military moves. This situation changed in the spring of 1940, when Germany invaded Holland, Belgium, and France. Again, German On December 7, 1941, the Japanese launched an attack on the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor, killing well over 2,000 Americans and causing great damage to many of the ships anchored there, including the sinking of the battleship USS Arizona (right). NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION 458 WORLD WAR II military forces overwhelmed their opponents, leaving Great Britain the only outpost against Germany. United States Involvement During the 1930s the United States government had avoided involvement in European affairs. This traditional policy of “isolationism” became more problematic after the war began in 1939. President FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT moved away from an isolationist foreign policy and sought to assist Great Britain and France, while keeping the United States a neutral party to the conflict. This strategy led to the repeal of the arms embargo in the Neutrality Act of 1939 (22 U.S.C.A. § 441), allowing the sale of military equipment to Great Britain and France. After the fall of France to Germany in 1940, Roosevelt became even more determined to assist Great Britain. He persuaded Congress to pass the LEND-LEASE ACT of 1941 (55 Stat. 31). Lend-Lease provided munitions, food, machin- ery, and services to Great Britain and other Allies without immediate cost. Pearl Harbor On December 7, 1941, the Japanese launched an attack on the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, killing over 2,000 Americans and causing great damage to many of the ships anchored there, including the sinking of the battleship USS Arizona. The devastating Japanese attack on the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor resulted in a U.S. declaration of war on Japan the following day. Germany and Italy, as part of the Axis powers alliance, then declared war on the United States. The attack on the United States led to severe consequences for Japanese Americans. On February 19, 1942, President Roosevelt issued EXECUTIVE ORDER No. 9,066, directing the forced relocation of all 112,000 Japanes e Americans living on the West Coast (70,000 of them U.S. citizens) to detention camps in such places as Jerome, Arkansas, and Heart Lake, Wyoming. Roosevelt issued the order after military leaders, worried about a Japanese invasion, argued that national security required such drastic action. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the forced relocation in KOREMATSU V. UNITED STATES, 323 U.S. 214, 65 S. Ct. 193, 89 L. Ed. 194 (1944). Justice HUGO L. BLACK noted that curtailing the rights of a single racial group is constitutionally suspect but that in this case military necessity justified the exclusion of Japanese Americans from the West Coast. In retrospect, historians have characterized the removal and detention as the most drastic invasion of individual CIVIL RIGHTS by the government in U.S. history. United States Enters the War Even before its formal entry in the war, the United States had begu n to mobilize for protective reasons. Through a series of expen- diture programs, the United States spent an estimated $34 billion on military needs prior to entry into the war. After the United States formally declared war against Japan, Germany, and Italy, the U.S. government immediately stepped up its spending. In January 1942, Roosevelt announced massive production goals, including 60,000 airplanes in 1942 and 125,000 airplanes in 1943. By the middle of 1941, the U.S. Army had 1.5 million solders organized into 34 divisions. Through the implementation of the draft and massive recruitment efforts, the United States built its Army to a total of 5.4 million, including 700,000 African Americans. U.S. Home Front The United States had to address several challenges during the war. Building and sup- porting the military was costly, and the govern- ment had to raise taxes to help support the war. A wide range of products were rationed, including food, fuel, rubber, and anything else vital to the war effort. Many industries were reconfigured to focus on war needs. With so many young men needed in the war, women entered the workforce in massive numbers. One of the enduring images of World War II has been “Rosie the Riveter,” representing women working in factories. European Front The Allies determined that priority would be given to defeating Germany and Italy. The Soviet Union, under the leadership of JOSEPH STALIN,had signed a nonaggression pact with Germany in 1939, just days before Germany’sinvasionof Poland. In June 1941 Hitler renounced the agreement and invaded the Soviet Union. The Russian front proved to be the bloodiest of the war. The Soviet military suffered the greatest GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION WORLD WAR II 459 number of casualties among all of the participants in the war, including 9 million dead and 18 million injured. The Allies stemmed Axis advances in 1942. On the Russian front, the Soviet troops won a decisive victory at the Battle of Stalingrad. Following this battle, Soviet forces began the slow process of pushing the German army back toward its border. The U.S. Army achieved success in routing German forces from North Africa in 1942, paving the way for the invasion of Sicily and Italy in 1943. D-Day and Its Aftermath On June 6, 1944 (D-Day), the Allies mounted an amphibious landing on France’s Normandy coast. The D-Day invasion surprised the German military commanders, who did not expect an invasion at this location. In a short time, U.S. and British forces were able to break out of the coastal areas and move into France. U.S. forces liberated Paris on August 25. Germany could not succeed in fighting a two-front war. By early 1945 it was clear that an Allied victory was inevitable. On April 30, 1945, with the Russian army entering Berlin, Hitler committed SUICIDE. On May 7, 1945, Germany unconditionally surrendered. War in the Pacific The war in the Pacific was primarily a conflict between Japanese and U.S. forces. The U.S. Navy inflicted substantial damage to the Japanese fleet at the Battle of Midway in June 1942. Following Midway, the U.S. forces began invading Japanese-held islands in the South Pacific. This endeavor was a slow and costly process because Japanese soldiers were taught to fight to the death. However, the process proved successful. From 1942 to 1945, U.S. forces invaded numer- ous islands, the last being Okinawa, which is close to the Japanese mainland. Despite fierce resistance, U.S. forces prevailed. In 1945 the U.S. military prepared for the invasion of Japan. Though a Ja panese defeat appeared inevitable, an invasion would result in heavy U.S. casualties. President HARRY S. TRUMAN, who had become president in April 1945 after the death of President Roosevelt, approved the dropping of atomic bombs on two Japanese cities. On August 6 the United States dropped the atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima, destroying it and killing about 100,000 civilians in the first ten seconds; three days later the United States dropped a second atomic bomb on the city of Nagasaki. Japan opened peace negotiations on August 10 and surrendered on September 2. Wartime conferences among Roosevelt, Stalin, and British prime minister Winston Churchill led to the creation of the UNITED NATIONS in 1945. At the Yalta Conference in 1945, the leaders agreed to divide Germany, as well as the city of Berlin, into four zones of occupation controlled by forces from the three countries and France. Germany was to have its industrial base rebuilt, but its armaments industries were to be abolished or confiscated. The leaders also approved the creation of an international court to try German leaders as war criminals, setting the stage for the NUREMBERG TRIALS . The Soviet army’s occupation of Eastern Europe soon gave way to the creation of Communist governments under the influence of the Soviet Union. Casualties An estimated 60 million people died in the war. This includes 20 million soldiers and 40 million civilians. An estimated 300,000 American sol- diers died, and another 300,000 were injured. German losses were far more severe, with 3.5 million soldiers killed and another 4.6 million injured. FURTHER READINGS Ernst, Daniel R., and Victor Jew, eds. 2002. Total War and the Law: The American Home Front in World War II. Westport, CT: Praeger. Hershey, John. 1966. Hiroshima. New York: Bantam. Joseph, Jennifer. 2001. “POWs Left in the Cold: Compensa- tion Eludes American WWII Slave Laborers for Private Japanese Companies.” Pepperdine Law Review 29 (December). Lord, Walter. 2001. Day of Infamy: The Classic Account of the Bombing of Pearl Harbor. New York: Holt. Lyons, Michael J. 2003. World War II: A Short History. Paramus, NJ: Prentice Hall. Park, Byoungwook. 2002. “Comfort Women during WWII: Are U.S. Courts a Final Resort for Justice?” American University International Law Review 17 (March-April). Vandiver, Frank E. 2003. 1001 Things Everyone Should Know about World War II. New York: Broadway Books. CROSS REFERENCES Communism; Eisenhower, Dwight David; Hirohito; Hitler, Adolf; Japanese American Evacuation Cases; Korematsu v. United States; Marshall Plan; Mussolini, Benito; Nuremberg Trials; Roosevelt, Franklin Delano; Tokyo Trial; United Nations; War Crimes; Yalta Agreement GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 460 WORLD WAR II WORTHIER TITLE DOCTRINE A COMMON LAW rule that provides that a conveyance of real property by a grantor to another person for life with a limitation to the grantor’s heirs creates a reversion in the grantor by which his or her heirs acquire the property only upon the death of the grantor, not upon the death of the person who has been granted the property for life. The worthier title doctrine comes from English feudal real PROPERTY LAW and is based on the presumption that a title by descent (land inherited by an heir) is worthier (better) than a title by conveyance (purchase.) If a grantor or a testator attempts to convey a future in terest in land to the grantor’s heirs, the heirs would be getting by conveyance what they would other- wise take by descent, making the conveyance void. For example, A deeds Blackacre to B for life, and then to the heirs of A. The effect of the doctrine is that A has a reversion (a future interest remaining with A in the property), while B has a life estate. The words to the heirs of A are words of limitation , which are required under the worthier title doctrine. If the heirs acquire the property at all, it is only after the death of the owner. If the heirs had a remainder interest in the property, they would acquire it after the death of B, the grantee with the life estate, regardless of whether A, the grantor, was alive or dea d. The deed or will would have to contain language such as “to B for life and to C, D, E, (the heirs) in fee.” The worthier title doctrine has been abol- ished in many states by the UNIFORM PROBATE CODE , § 2-710. Where the doctrine has been abolished, language in a governing instrument describing the beneficiaries of a disposition as the transferor’s heirs, heirs at law, next of kin, distributees, relatives,orfamily, or language of similar import, does not create a reversionary interest in the transferor. In effect, the reversion interest is eliminated and the heirs rece ive their unrestricted remainder interest in the property. v WRIGHT, JAMES SKELLY James Skelly Wright served as a federal district judge in Louisiana from 1949 to 1962 and as a federal court of appeals judge in Washington, D.C., from 1962 to 1986. From 1978 to 1981, he was the chief judge of the D.C. Circuit Court. Wright distinguished himself as a district judge during the 1950s when he forced the desegrega- tion of the New Orleans, Louisiana, public schools and the city’s public transportation system. Wrigh t continued this course on the federal appeals court when he ordered sweeping changes in the discriminatory policies of the District of Columbia’s school system. Wright was born on January 14, 1911, in New Orleans. He graduated from Loyola University in New Orleans in 1931 and earned a law degree from Loyola Law School in 1934. Unable to find legal work during the Great Depression, Wright taught high school and lectured in history at Loyola until 1937, when he became an assistant U.S. attorney in New Orleans. During WORLD WAR II, he served in the U.S. Coast Guard as the legal aide to an admiral at the U.S. Embassy in London. After the war, Wright briefly practiced law in Washington, D.C., before moving back to James Skelly Wright 1911–1988 ❖ 1911 Born, New Orleans, La. ◆ 1937 Appointed assistant U.S. attorney in New Orleans 1948 Appointed U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of La. 1988 Died, Washington, D.C. 1962–86 Sat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 1949–62 Sat on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of La. 1914–18 World War I 1961–73 Vietnam War 1939–45 World War II 1950–53 Korean War ▼▼ ▼▼ 19001900 19501950 19751975 20002000 19251925 ❖ 1954 U.S. Supreme Court outlawed "separate but equal" education in Brown v. Board of Education 1956 Ordered desegregation of New Orleans public schools in Bush v. Orleans Parish School Bd. ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆◆ 1970 Ruled in favor of slum tenants in Jarvins v. First National Realty Corp. 1967 Eliminated the D.C. public schools' "tracking system" in Hobson v. Hansen GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION WRIGHT, JAMES SKELLY 461 New Orleans. In 1948 President HARRY S. TRUMAN named him U.S. attorney in New Orleans and a year later appointed him to the federal district court in New Orleans. Wright’s 13 years on the district bench were controversial. In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’sdecisionin BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF TOPEKA , KANSAS, 347 U.S. 483, 74 S. Ct. 686, 98 L. Ed. 873 (1954), which outlawed state- sponsored racial SEGREGATION of public schools, Wright granted the NAACP’srequestto desegregate the New Orleans public schools. His decision in Bush v. Orleans Parish School Bd., 138 F. Supp. 337 (1956), was met with resistance by virtually every public official in Louisiana. By the time Wright assumed the appellate bench in 1962, he had issued 41 rulings and had injunctions in force against the governor, the attorney general, the superintendent of education, the state police, the NATIONAL GUARD, all district attorneys, all sheriffs, all mayors, all police chiefs, and the state legislature. In 1962 President JOHN F. KENNEDY wished to appoint Wright to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which is based in New Orleans. Vehement opposition from Southern senators dissuaded Kennedy from going for- ward with the nomination. Instead, he appointed Wright to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. As an appellate judge, Wright continued his career of judicial activism. He took major steps toward eliminating discrimination against poor African-Americans in the district’spublic schools. To that end, he ordered sweeping changes in the schools. In Hobson v. Hansen, 269 F. Supp. 401 (D.D.C. 1967), he eliminated the “tracking” system, which attempted to place schoolchildren according to mental ability in hopes of stimulating bright children and helping slower ones. However, that system often resulted in placement along racial lines, with most African-Americans being placed in lower tracks, and whites being placed in upper tracks. In other cases, Wright broadened the concept of illegal discrimination to include “de facto” discrimina- tion (where segregation exists mainly because of social and economic patterns). Wright also issued rulings that advanced CONSUMER PROTECTION. He ruled in favor of the rights of slum tenants to withhold rent for dilapidated and rat-infested dwellings (Jarvins v. First National Realty Corp., 428 F.2d 1071 [D.C. Cir. 1970]), and provided remedies for poor consumers w ho had signed “unconscionable” contracts, which contained excessive rates of interest and threatened them with repossession of goods if they failed to make payments. (Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co., 350 F.2d 445 [D.C. Cir. 1965]). Throughout his years on the bench, Wright espoused what he once described as a JURISPRU- DENCE of “goodness,” which he said was inspired by the work of U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice EARL WARREN. In this jurisprudence, what was “fair” was often more important than what had been held in previous cases. Wright assumed senior status in 1986 and died on August 6, 1988, in Washington, D.C. FURTHER READINGS Brennan, William J., Jr., Abner J. Mikva, and Geoffrey R. Stone. 1988. “Tributes to J. Skelly Wright.” Yale Law Journal 98 (December). Brown, John R., et al. 1989. “In Memoriam: Judge J. Skelly Wright.” George Washington Law Review 57 (May). Miller, Arthur S., and Jeffrey H. Bowman. 1983. “Judge J. Skelly Wright and the Administrative Process: Activism or Passivism—Or Both?” New England Law Review 18 (fall). Monroe, Bill, et al. 1988. “In Memoriam: J. Skelly Wright.” Harvard Law Review 102 (December). Wright, Helen Patton. 1995. My Journey: Recollections of the First Seventy Years. Chevy Chase, MD: Posterity Press. CROSS REFERENCE School Desegregation. WRIT An order issued by a court requiring that something be done or giving authority to do a specified act. The development of English COMMON LAW relied on the courts to issue writs that allowed persons to proceed with a legal action. Over time, the courts also used writs to direct other courts, sheriffs, and attorneys to perform certain actions. In modern law, courts primarily use writs to grant extraordinary relief, to grant the right of appeal, or to grant the sheriff authority to seize property. Most other common law writs were discarded in U.S. law as the courts moved to simpler and more general methods of starting civil actions. U.S. courts commonly use several extraor- dinary writs, which are issued only when the courts believe that usual remedies have failed. THERE ARE SOCIAL AND POLITICAL PROBLEMS WHICH AT TIMES SEEM TO DEFY RESOLUTION [IN THE POLITICAL ARENA ]. IN SUCH SITUATIONS THE JUDICIARY MUST BEAR A HAND AND ACCEPT ITS RESPONSIBILITY TO ASSIST IN THE SOLUTION WHERE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS HANG IN THE BALANCE . —J. SKELLY WRIGHT GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 462 WRIT Writ of Habeas Corpus The writ of HABEAS CORPUS, sometimes called the “great writ,” is probably the best-known exam- ple of a writ. A writ of habeas corpus is a legal document ordering anyone who is officially holding the petitioner (the person requesting the writ) to bring him into court to determine whether the detention is unlawful. A federal court can hear an application for a writ of habeas corpus by a state prisoner who is being held in CUSTODY, allegedly in violation of the U.S. Constitution or the laws of the United States. Writ of Mandamus The writ of MANDAMUS is an extraordinary writ that directs a public official or government department to take an action. It may be sent to the EXECUTIVE BRANCH, the legislative branch, or a lower court. The famous case of MARBURY V. MADISON, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 2 L. Ed. 60 (1803), which established the right of JUDICIAL REVIEW of congressional statutes, was an action for a writ of mandamus. William Marbury asked the court to issue the writ to SECRETARY OF STATE JAMES MADISON , commanding him to deliver his judicial commission. The Court, however, re- fused to issue the writ of mandamus. Writ of Prohibition The writ of prohibition is another extraordinary writ and is the opposite of a writ of mandamus, because it commands a government official not to take a specified action. The most common use of the writ is by an APPELLATE court to a lower court, commanding the lower court to refrain from a proposed action. For example, a trial court might grant a request by the news media to release information from a court file. A DEFENDANT who objects to the release could petition for a writ of prohibition from the court of appeals. If the appellate court issues the writ, the trial court may not release the information. Writ of Certiorari The writ of CERTIORARI is an extraordinary writ, issued by an appellate court, that is used when that court has discretion on whether to hear an appeal from a lower court. If the writ is denied, the lower court’s decision remains unchanged. The U.S. SUPREME COURT has used the petition and writ of certiorari to control its caseload since 1925. Writ of Quo Warranto The extraordinary w rit of QUO WARRANTO starts a proceeding in which the state challenges the legality of the use of an office, franchise, charter, or other right that can be held or used under authority of the state. For example, a writ of quo warranto would be used to remove a person who illegally holds public office, or to nullify an illegal amendment to a municipal charter. Writ of Attachment A writ of attachment is a court order used to force obedience to another order or a judgment of the court. It was originally used to order a sheriff or law enforcement officer to take a disobedient party into custody and to bring her before the court to answer for the CONTEMPT.In modern law, a writ of attachment orders seizure of the defendant’s property, rather than the defendant’s person, to secure the satisfaction of a judgment that has not yet been secured. Modern law limits the scope and effect of attachment procedures to safeguard the defen- dant’s rights to liberty and DUE PROCESS OF LAW. Writ of Execution A writ of execution may be issued after a PLAINTIFF wins a judgment in a civil case and is awarded damages. The writ directs the sheriff to take the property of the defendant in satisfac- tion of the court-imposed debt. Writ of Entry A writ of entry is an instrument used in an action brought to recover land wrongfully withheld from the true owner or tenant entitled to possession and use of the land. It establishes who is entitled to possessio n of a parcel of land but does not settle the issue of who is the true owner. The central inquiry concerns which of the two individuals has the superior right of possession and use of the land at the time of the action. To determine the priority of the rights of the parties fighting over land, the court must consider how and when each individual ac- quired ownership or possession. In general, modern laws permit the recovery of monetary damages for rent or abuse of property, as well as recovery of possession of the land. The individual who has been in posse ssion of the land may be compensated for any improve- ments he or she has made in the property. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION WRIT 463 The writ of entry is used in only a few states to recover the possession of land. It has been replaced by the action to recover possession of real property. Writ of Error A writ of error is an order issued from an appellate court directed to the judge of a lower court, mandating the judge to release the trial record of an action in which the judge has entered a final judgment. The appellate court issues the writ so that it may review the case and either reverse, correct, or affirm the lower court’s decision. Most states have replaced the writ of error with a simpler appellate document, usually called the “notice of appeal.” CROSS REFERENCES Prohibition; Writ of; Writs of Assistance Case. WRITS OF ASSISTANCE CASE The Writs of Assistance case involved a legal dispute during 1761 in which 63 Boston merchants petitioned the Massachusetts Superior Court to challenge the legality of a particular type of SEARCH WARRANT called a writ of assistance. Also known as Paxton’sCase,theWrits of Assistance case contributed to the Founding Fathers’ origi- nal understanding of SEARCH AND SEIZURE law, planted the seeds of JUDICIAL REVIEW in the United States, and helped shape the U.S. concept of NATURAL LAW. Parliament created the writ of assistan ce during the seventeenth century. Once issued, the writ authorized government officials to look for contraband in private homes and businesses. Normally, the writ placed no limitations on the time, place, or manner of a given search. In the eighteenth century, customs officials in America used the writ to investigate colonial merchants who were suspected of SMUGGLING goods into the country. The writ generally commanded all constables, peace officers, and nearby subjects to help customs officials carry out a search. The Writs of Assistance case arose when James Paxton, a Massachusetts customs official, applied to the superior court for a writ of assistance. JAMES OTIS JR ., advocate general for the colony of Massachusetts, resigned his post to represent the merchants who opposed the writ. Appearing before Chief Justice Thomas Hutchinson, Otis and his co-counsel, Oxenbridge Thacher, made four arguments against the legality of the writ. First, Thacher challenged the authority of the Massachusetts Superior Court to issue the writ. Thacher conceded that Parliament had passed a law in 1662 granting the English Court of Exchequer the power to issue the writ in Great Britain and passed a second law in 1696 enabling customs officials to apply for the writ in America. However, Thacher argued that neither law specified which courts in America could issue the writ. Thus, Thacher said that the Massachusetts Superior Court was never ex- pressly delegated authority to issue the writ. Second, Otis challenged the procedure by which the writs were issued. Otis argued that bare suspicion should not be enough to support an application for the writ. Otis maintained that no writ should be issued unless the official making the application is first placed under oath and made to disclose the evidence on which the application is based. Otis also suggested that every writ application should be carefully reviewed by an impartial third party and not the judges who had been appointed to the Massachusetts Super- ior Court. Those judges, Otis charged, were predisposed in favor of granting the writ. Third, Otis challenged the writ applications for lack of specificity. A lawful writ application, Otis asserted, must identify the person, place, or thing to be searched. Under ENGLISH LAW,customs officials were authorized to search for contraband in any house, shop, cellar, warehouse, room, or other place where uncustomed goods might be hidden. If colonial residents resisted, customs officials were authorized to break open doors, chests, trunks, and other packages that might lead to incriminating evidence. Because the duration of the writ was perpetual and could be executed at any time of the day or night, Otis said, the law failed to respect the sanctity of a person’s home and private life. Fourth, Otis challenged Parliament’s auto- cratic authority. Parliament has no power to pass legislation, Otis claimed, that is against fundamental principles of law. When Parlia- ment enacts legislation that contravenes funda- mental principles of reason and EQUITY, such legislation must be struck down by the courts. Otis contended that Parliament was not above the law and that any parliamentary act against the constitution was void. In response to these arguments, la wyers for the government asserted that the Massachusetts Superior Court possessed no discretion to deny GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 464 WRITS OF ASSISTANCE CASE Paxton’s application for the writ. Parliament had granted the English Court of Exchequer the power to issue the writ in Great Britain and authorized customs officials to apply for the writ in America. Parliament also gave the Massachusetts Superior Court the same powers as the English Court of Exchequer. Because the Court of Exchequer had been lawfully issuing the writ for years in Great Britain, lawyers for the government argued, the Massachusetts Superior Court enjoyed the same legal authority. Chief Justice Hutchinson and his colleagues agreed with the lawyers for the government. They unanimously voted to grant Paxton’s application in this particular case and affirmed the legality of the writ across Massachusetts. Although Otis, Thacher, and their clients lost the case, they transformed the writ into a rallying cry of the American Revolution. Colonial opposition to the writ quickly evolved from civil disobedience to armed resistance. By 1769 many colonial courts had grown reluctant to issue the writ. This series of events prompted JOHN ADAMS to exclaim that the Writs of Assistance case gave birth to the “Child Independence!” In addition to fueling the revolutionary spirit in the colonies, the Writs of Assistance case presented the first formidable challenge to general search warrants in the colonies. Otis thought that more restrictions should be placed on the government’s authority to intrude upon places ordinarily kept private by homeowners and business proprietors. In America, Otis argued, the law should require that all searches be conducted pursuant to a lawful warrant that is obtain ed by an official who is placed under oath before a neutral third party and compelled to disclose the precise nature of any incriminat- ing evidence. Any warrant that might be issued should fully describe the person or premises to be searched. The FOURTH AMENDMENT to the U.S. Constitution established these principles as a permanent part of U.S. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. The Writs of Assistance case also planted the seeds of judicial revi ew in the United States. Judicial review is the power of the judiciary to invalidate legislative acts that violate a constitu- tional provision or principle. The English system of government did not recognize judicial review during the eighteenth century. Neither a common-law court nor the crown possessed the power to overturn a law duly enacted by Parliament. In the United States, Otis suggested in the Writs of Assistance case, legislative acts that contravene the Constitution must be struck down by co urts of law. Finally, the Writs of Assistance case helped shape the form of natural law in the United States. Some people believe in natural law, a body of unwritten principles derived from religion, morality, and secular philosophy. In certain instances natural law is said to transcend the written rules and regulations that are enacted by government. During the Writs of Assistance case, Otis argued that the written laws of Parliament are limited by unwritten princi- ples of reason and equity. The “constitution” to which Otis referred was itself an unwritten body of English common-law principles. (The United States Constitution was not ratified until 1787.) FURTHER READINGS Bailyn, Bernard. 1992. The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press. Henretta, James A. and David Brody. 2009. America: A Concise History. Boston, Mass.: Bed/St. Martin. Klein, Irving J., et al. 1994. Principles of the Law of Arrest, Search, Seizure, and Liability Issues. South Miami, Fla: Coral Gables Publishing. Levy, Leonard. 1988. Original Intent and the Framers’ Constitution. New York: Macmillan. Smith, M. H. 1978. The Writs of Assistance Case. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press. Stoner, James. 1992. Common Law and Liberal Theory: Coke, Hobbes, and the Origins of American Constitutionalism. Lawrence: Univ. Press of Kansas. CROSS REFERENCES Contraband; Fourth Amendment; Judicial Review; Search Warrant; Warrant. WRONG A violation, by one individual, of another individual’s legal rights. The idea of rights suggests the opposite idea of wrongs, for every right is capable of being violated. For example, a right to receive payment for goods sold implies a wrong on the part of the person who owes, but does not make payment. In the most general point of view, the law is intended to establish and maintain rights, yet in its everyday application, the law must deal with rights and wrongs. The law first fixes the character and definition of rights, and then seeks to secure these rights by defining wrongs and devising the means to prevent these wrongs or provide for their redress. The CRIMINAL LAW is charged with preventing and punishing public wrongs. Public wrongs are GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION WRONG 465 violations of public rights and duties that affect the whole community. A private wrong, also called a civil wrong, is a violation of public or private righ ts that injures an individual and consequently is subject to civil redress or compensation. A civil wrong that is not based on breach of contract is a TORT. Torts include assault, BATTERY, LIBEL, slander, intentional infliction of mental distress, and damage to property. The same act or omission that makes a tort may also be a breach of contract, but it is the NEGLIGENCE, not the breaking of the contract, that is the tort. For example, if a lawyer is negligent in representing his client, the lawyer may be sued both for MALPRACTICE, which is a tort, and for breach of the attorney-client contract. The word wrongful is attached to numerous types of injurious condu ct. For example, wrongful death is a type of lawsuit brought on behalf of a deceased person’s beneficiaries that alleges that the death was attributable to the willful or negligent conduct of another. How- ever, even in these special contexts, the words wrong, wrongful, and wrongfully do not sharply delineate the exact nature of the wrongness. Their presence merely signifies that something bad has occurred. WRONGFUL BIRTH A MEDICAL MALPRACTICE claim brought by the parents of a child born with birth defects, alleging that negligent treatment or advice deprived them of the opportunity to avoid conception or termi- nate the pregnancy. A wrongful birth action is conceptually similar to a WRONGFUL LIFE action. In a wrongful birth action, parents seek damages for a child born with birth defects. The claim for damages is based on the cost to parents of raising an unexpectedly defective child. In a wrongful life action, the child seeks damages for being born with a birth defect rather than not being born . A wrongful birth action was first recognized in Jacobs v. Theimer, 519 S.W.2d 846 (Tex. 1975). The case involved an action by the parents of a child born with defects caused by the mother contracting rubella in her first month of pregnancy. The claim was that the DEFENDANT was negligent in failing to diagnose the rubella in the mother. The Texas Supreme Court allowed damages, but only for expenses reasonably necessary for the care and treatment of the child’s impairment. The parents were not awarded any noneconomic damages such as damages for pain and suffering. Most wrongful birth suits would have little chance of succeeding if not for the decriminal- ization of ABORTION by the U.S. Supreme Court in ROE V. WADE, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S. Ct. 705, 35 L. Ed. 2d 147 (1973), since the parents of a child with birth defects could not argue that they would have had an abortion had they known of the defect. In addition, some courts were reluctant to award damages, ruling that it was impossible to weigh the economic and emo- tional costs of raising an impaired child against the intangible joys of parenthood. Since the mid-1970s, however, more than 20 states have recognized wrongful birth actions that enable parents to collect some or all of their CHILD CARE expenses if they can prove NEGLI- GENCE . With improved genetic testing, medical providers can routinely determine early in pregnancy the presence of certain birth defects in the fetus. This imposes on medical providers the duty to order the correct tests and to properly diagnose the results. CROSS REFERENCES Tort Law; Wrongful Pregnancy. WRONGFUL DEATH The taking of the life of an individual resulting from the willful or negligent act of another person or persons. If a person is killed because of the wrongful conduct of a person or persons, the decedent’s heirs and other beneficiaries may file a wrongful death action against those responsible for the decedent’s death. This area of TORT LAW is governed by statute. Wrongful death statutes vary from state to state, but in general they define who may sue for wrongful death and what, if any, limits may be applied to an award of damages. Originally, wrongful death statutes were created to provide financial support for widows and orphans and to motivate people to exercise care to prevent injuries. A wrongful death action is separate and apart from criminal charges. This means that a DEFENDANT acquitted of MURDER may be sued in a CIVIL ACTION by the victim’sfamily for wrongful death. An action for wrongful death may be brought for either an intentional or unintentional act that GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 466 WRONGFUL BIRTH causes an injury that results in death. A blow to the head during an altercation that later results in death is an injury that is intentionally caused. The driver of an automobile who unintentionally causes the death of another in an accident may be heldliable for NEGLIGENCE.Anindividualwho,in violation of local law, neglects to enclose a swimming pool in his yard can be held liable for _____________________________________________ [Date] _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ [Name and address of attorney or unrepresented party] Re: ___________________________________________________ [Case name] Dear __________________________________________________ [name of, e.g., attorney for defendant]: This will confirm your recent telephone conversation with my associate in which you stated that the total insurance coverage applicable to this case amounts to only $100,000. On the basis of this statement, we have conferred with our clients and have obtained their authority to accept the sum of $100,000 in full settlement of their claim against your insureds for the wrongful death of our clients' son, Jeff Smith. This offer is conditioned, however, on your (1) providing this office with proof of the limits of the applicable insurance policy or policies and (2) payment of the policy limits within 15 days from the date of this letter. As you know, this is an open-and-shut case of liability against your ins ureds. Joe Jones negligently and recklessly drove his vehicle over the center line of Highway 1 in Marin County, colliding head-on with the automobile driven by Jeff Smith. Joe Jones was cited by the California Highway Patrol for violation of Vehicle Code section 21460(a) and was charged with vehicular manslaughter in the death of Jeff Smith. It is also obvious that this case is worth well over the stated policy limits of $100,000. At the time of his death, Jeff Smith was a healthy, 25-year-old serviceman stationed at Fort Honor, enjoyed an extremely close and loving relationship with his parents, and remained in constant contact with them while he was in the army. The tragic nature of this case is compounded by the fact that the Smiths lost another son in an accident shortly before Jeff's death and by the fact that Jeff's father, Jim, suffered a massive heart attack immediately after learning of Jeff's death. Jim is now permanently disabled and totally dependent on his surviving children for support. Given the close bond between Jeff and his father, there is no question that Jeff would have contributed substantially to his father's support for the balance of his life. Both parents have now been deprived of the support as well as the love, care, comfort, affection, society, and protection that Jeff would have provided them had he survived. The jury verdict potential in this case is further evident from a review of recent California verdicts involving the wrongful death of a child. As a matter of fact, our office recently obtained a jury verdict of $800,000 in the case of Doe v Roe (Fresno County Superior Court) for the wrongful death of a four-year-old child. Certainly the death of a 25-year-old son would yield a verdict far above that figure, particularly in view of the factors discu ssed above. As previously mentioned, this offer to settle within the applicable policy limits will remain open for 15 days from the date of this letter. If it has not been accepted by that time, this demand will be withdrawn, and we will proceed to trial. If you do not fully comply with this demand, we will have to conclude that the insurance company is acting in bad faith and proceed accordingly. After we receive a jury verdict over $100,000, we will seek an assignment from the insureds and proceed against the carrier for its bad faith and outrageous conduct in the negotiations pertaining to this case. I need not remind you of the numerous decisions in which an insurance company has been held liable for the full amount of the jury verdict when the company chose to subject its insureds to personal liability instead of settling the case for the limits of the insurance policy. See, e.g., Johansen v California State Auto. Ins. Inter-Ins. Bureau (1975) 15 C3d 9; Gruenberg v Aetna Ins. Co. (1973) 9 C3d 666; Richardson v Employers Liab. & Ins. Co. (1972) 25 CA3d 333; Fletcher v Western Nat'l Life Ins. Co. (1970) 10 CA3d 376; and Crisci v Security Ins. Co. (1967) 66 C2d 425. Please feel free to call this office if you have any questions or need any additional information on this matter. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, ______________________________________________________ [Signature of, e.g., attorney for plaintiff] ______________________________________________________ [ T yp ed name ] Demand Letter: Wrongful Death Case A sample demand letter in a case seeking recovery for wrongful death. ILLUSTRATION BY GGS CREATIVE RESOURCES. REPRODUCED BY PERMISSION OF GALE, A PART OF CENGAGE LEARNING. GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3 RD E DITION WRONGFUL DEATH 467 . to be the bloodiest of the war. The Soviet military suffered the greatest GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION WORLD WAR II 459 number of casualties among all of the participants in. WRIGHT GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 462 WRIT Writ of Habeas Corpus The writ of HABEAS CORPUS, sometimes called the “great writ,” is probably the best-known exam- ple of a writ War Crimes; Yalta Agreement GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 460 WORLD WAR II WORTHIER TITLE DOCTRINE A COMMON LAW rule that provides that a conveyance of real property by a grantor