The University of Memphis Law Review is a student-run legal journal. It is the main law review of the Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law.
A predecessor of the review, entitled Memphis State University Law Commentary began publishing a topically arranged loose-leaf in post binders in 1968. Its first editor-in-chief was Charles H. Johnston. It was not until 1970 that this publication was reformatted as a regular journal, entitled Memphis State University Law Review. In 1994, the review officially became known as the University of Memphis Law Review.
In 1993, the National Conference of Law Reviews, an organization of approximately 200 law reviews and journals, selected the University of Memphis Law Review as its first national headquarters, and the review held that position until 2003.
The review publishes four issues per year and is staffed by approximately sixty students. From the third-year members, an editorial board is selected, typically in early spring, which manages the review. The current editor-in-chief is Jane Marie Lewis.
Famous quotes containing the words university of, university, law and/or review:
“It is in the nature of allegory, as opposed to symbolism, to beg the question of absolute reality. The allegorist avails himself of a formal correspondence between “ideas” and “things,” both of which he assumes as given; he need not inquire whether either sphere is “real” or whether, in the final analysis, reality consists in their interaction.”
—Charles, Jr. Feidelson, U.S. educator, critic. Symbolism and American Literature, ch. 1, University of Chicago Press (1953)
“A University should be a place of light, of liberty, and of learning.”
—Benjamin Disraeli (1804–1881)
“Just as the constant increase of entropy is the basic law of the universe, so it is the basic law of life to be ever more highly structured and to struggle against entropy.”
—Václav Havel (b. 1936)
“Generally there is no consistent evidence of significant differences in school achievement between children of working and nonworking mothers, but differences that do appear are often related to maternal satisfaction with her chosen role, and the quality of substitute care.”
—Ruth E. Zambrana, U.S. researcher, M. Hurst, and R.L. Hite. “The Working Mother in Contemporary Perspectives: A Review of Literature,” Pediatrics (December 1979)