Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Iqbal (2)
- Twombly (2)
- 12(b)(6) (1)
- Abstention (1)
- Access to the courts (1)
-
- Burden of Proof (1)
- Business interruption (1)
- Certification (1)
- Chevron (1)
- Civil Trial (1)
- Civil rights (1)
- Class actions (1)
- Congressional Privilege (1)
- Conley (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Covid-19 (1)
- Discovery (1)
- Discriminate (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Dispute system design (1)
- Ecuador (1)
- Employment (1)
- Erie (1)
- Ethics (1)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1)
- Forum non conveniens (1)
- Globalization (1)
- Government liability for constitutional deprivation (1)
- Infringement of constitutional rights (1)
- Insurance (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Federal Courts’ Recalcitrance In Refusing To Certify State Law Covid-19 Business Interruption Insurance Issues, Christopher French
Federal Courts’ Recalcitrance In Refusing To Certify State Law Covid-19 Business Interruption Insurance Issues, Christopher French
Journal Articles
Over 2,000 COVID-19 business interruption insurance cases have been filed in state and federal courts the past two years with most of the cases filed in or removed to federal courts. The cases are governed by state law. Rather than certify the novel state law issues presented in the cases to the respective state supreme courts that ultimately will determine the law applicable in the cases, each of the eight federal circuit courts to issue decisions on the merits in such cases to date has done so by making an Erie guess regarding how the controlling state supreme courts would …
When Bad Guys Are Wearing White Hats, Catherine A. Rogers
When Bad Guys Are Wearing White Hats, Catherine A. Rogers
Journal Articles
Allegations of ethical misconduct by lawyers have all but completely overshadowed the substantive claims in the Chevron case. While both sides have been accused of flagrant wrongdoing, the charges against plaintiffs’ counsel appear to have captured more headlines and garnered more attention. The primary reason why the focus seems lopsided is that plaintiffs’ counsel were presumed to be the ones wearing white hats in this epic drama. This essay postulates that this seeming irony is not simply an example of personal ethical lapse, but in part tied to larger reasons why ethical violations are an occupational hazard for plaintiffs’ counsel …
I Could Have Been A Contender: Summary Jury Trial As A Means To Overcome Iqbal's Negative Effects Upon Pre-Litigation Communication, Negotiation And Early, Consensual Dispute Resolution, Nancy A. Welsh
Journal Articles
With its recent decisions in Ashcroft v. Iqbal and Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, the Supreme Court may be intentionally or unintentionally “throwing the fight,” at least in the legal contests between many civil rights claimants and institutional defendants. The most obvious feared effect is reduction of civil rights claimants’ access to the expressive and coercive power of the courts. Less obviously, the Supreme Court may be effectively undermining institutions’ motivation to negotiate, mediate - or even communicate with and listen to - such claimants before they initiate legal action. Thus, the Supreme Court’s recent decisions have the potential to deprive …
The Supreme Court's Legislative Agenda To Free Government From Accountability For Constitutional Deprivations, Gary S. Gildin
The Supreme Court's Legislative Agenda To Free Government From Accountability For Constitutional Deprivations, Gary S. Gildin
Journal Articles
In Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, the Supreme Court adopted a new standard of factual particularity a plaintiff must meet to satisfy the requirement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) that a complaint plead a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” In Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the Court made clear that the Twombly pleading standard extended to civil actions seeking redress for deprivation of constitutional rights in particular, and universally to all Complaints filed in federal court. Commentators have debated whether after Iqbal, victims of constitutional wrongdoing will be able to …
Paradoxes, Gedanken Experiments And The Burden Of Proof: A Response To Dr. Cohen's Reply, David H. Kaye
Paradoxes, Gedanken Experiments And The Burden Of Proof: A Response To Dr. Cohen's Reply, David H. Kaye
Journal Articles
This article responds to L. Jonathan Cohen's critique of the author's position regarding the problem of naked statistical evidence. Cohen argues that the kind of probability at work in litigation does not conform to the axioms of mathematical probability. The author responds by suggesting that the familiar theory of probability needs no revision to account for the reluctance of a few courts to permit plaintiffs to prevail on the strength of background statistics alone. One need not adopt Dr. Cohen's esoteric mathematical structure to explain the burden of proof in civil cases. The article shows that whether or not one …
Congressional Papers And Judicial Subpoenas And The Constitution, David H. Kaye
Congressional Papers And Judicial Subpoenas And The Constitution, David H. Kaye
Journal Articles
Some contemporary Congresses have lost sight of the original scope of their predecessors' assertions of privilege and now claim an absolute privilege to withhold both the originals and copies of subpoenaed papers. A few judicial opinions suggest as much or more. It is possible that even cursorily documented, ill-considered dicta can take root and flourish, and to prevent that, this article This article charts the constitutional boundaries of Congress' privilege to withhold its internal papers from judicial subpoena. It surveys the privileges expressly given Congress in the text of the Constitution as well as the privileges that might be implied …