Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Empirical study (2)
- Patricia W. Moore (2)
- St. Mary’s University School of Law (2)
- Administrative Office of the United States Courts (1)
- Advisory Committee on Civil Rules (1)
-
- Caseload statistics (1)
- Chief Justice (1)
- Civil Rules Advisory Committee (1)
- Civil docket (1)
- Civil filings (1)
- Civil lawsuits (1)
- Civil litigation (1)
- Copyright troll (1)
- Cost and delay (1)
- Daubert standard (1)
- Dispositive motions (1)
- Empirical data (1)
- Empirical legal research (1)
- Federal District Courts (1)
- Federal Judicial Center (1)
- Federal Rule of Evidence (1)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1)
- Federal district court (1)
- Federalist Society (1)
- Internet Service Providers (1)
- John Doe lawsuits (1)
- Joinder (1)
- Judicial management (1)
- Lawyers for Civil Justice (1)
- Limited ownership interest (1)
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Measuring The Impact Of Plausibility Pleading, Alexander A. Reinert
Measuring The Impact Of Plausibility Pleading, Alexander A. Reinert
Faculty Articles
Ashcroft v. Iqbal and its predecessor, Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, introduced a change to federal pleading standards that had remained essentially static for five decades. Both decisions have occupied the attention of academics, jurists, and practitioners since their announcement. Iqbal alone has, as of this writing, been cited by more than 95,000 judicial opinions, more than 1,400 law review articles, and innumerable briefs and motions. Many scholars have criticized Iqbal and Twombly for altering the meaning of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure outside the traditional procedures contemplated by the Rules Enabling Act. Almost all commentators agree that …
The Supreme Court's Civil Assault On Civil Procedure, Alexander A. Reinert
The Supreme Court's Civil Assault On Civil Procedure, Alexander A. Reinert
Faculty Articles
No abstract provided.
Copyright Trolling, An Empirical Study, Matthew Sag
Copyright Trolling, An Empirical Study, Matthew Sag
Faculty Articles
This Article proceeds as follows: Part II locates MDJD suits within the broader context of the IP troll debate. It explains why attempts to define copyright trolls in terms of status—i.e., in terms of the plaintiff’s relationship to the underlying IP—are ultimately flawed and suggests a conduct-focused approach based on identifying systematic opportunism. Part II explains why MDJD lawsuits have all of the hallmarks of copyright trolling, and it explores the basic economics of MDJD litigation. It then presents empirical data documenting the astonishing rise of MDJD lawsuits over the past decade. Part III explores the role of statutory damages …
The Anti-Plaintiff Pending Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure And The Pro-Defendant Composition Of The Federal Rulemaking Committees, Patricia W. Moore
The Anti-Plaintiff Pending Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure And The Pro-Defendant Composition Of The Federal Rulemaking Committees, Patricia W. Moore
Faculty Articles
For decades, the Civil Rules Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee) has garnered passage of amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) that have incrementally narrowed discovery in the service of the Advisory Committee's stated effort to combat the alleged "cost and delay" of civil litigation. More of the same are on their way to Congress now. In the classical David-and-Goliath lawsuit brought by an individual person against an institutional defendant, these pending amendments hurt David and help Goliath more than any previous round of amendments to the FRCP. The individual versus institution case, not coincidentally, is the most common …
The Civil Caseload Of The Federal District Courts, Patricia W. Moore
The Civil Caseload Of The Federal District Courts, Patricia W. Moore
Faculty Articles
This Article responds to changes proposed by Congress and the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules to restrict civil lawsuits by reforming procedure. It argues that while these changes are purported to be based on empirical studies, there is no reference to actual government statistics about whether the civil caseload has grown, whether the median disposition time has increased, or whether the most prevalent types of civil cases have changed. Based on statistics published by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, this Article shows that the civil docket has actually stagnated, not exploded. It first looks at trends in …
Abrogation Magic: The Rules Enabling Act Process, Civil Rule 84, And The Forms, Brooke Coleman
Abrogation Magic: The Rules Enabling Act Process, Civil Rule 84, And The Forms, Brooke Coleman
Faculty Articles
The Committee on the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure seeks to abrogate Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 84 and its attendant Official Forms. Poof - after seventy-six years of service, the Committee will make Rule 84 and its forms disappear. This Essay argues, however, that like a magic trick, the abrogation sleight of hand is only a distraction from the truly problematic change the Committee is proposing. Abrogation of Rule 84 and the Official Forms violates the Rules Enabling Act process. The Forms are inextricably linked to the Rules; they cannot be eliminated or amended without making a change …
Civil-Izing Federalism, Brooke Coleman
Civil-Izing Federalism, Brooke Coleman
Faculty Articles
When Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito joined the United States Supreme Court, most commentators predicted it would become more conservative. Indeed, many believed that the reinvigorated federalism revolution under Chief Justice Rehnquist would, if anything, become more robust under the new chief. To a large degree, those commentators were right; the Court has decided numerous hotly contested federalism cases along predictable ideological lines. But there are some important counterexamples in the Court’s federalism jurisprudence. In a list of cases about access to plaintiff-friendly state courts, the Justices seem to abandon their federalism principles. Instead, the liberal wing of the …
The Efficiency Norm, Brooke Coleman
The Efficiency Norm, Brooke Coleman
Faculty Articles
Efficient is not synonymous with inexpensive. Rather, it refers to an optimal tradeoff between cost and function; a system may simultaneously become both less expensive and less efficient, if the cost savings are offset by an even greater loss of productivity. Yet, this Article argues that if we conceive of the rules and doctrines governing civil procedure as a product, the Judiciary, Congress, and federal civil rulemakers have confused cheap with efficient. They have made this version of “efficiency” — what this Article calls the efficiency norm — the dominant norm of the civil litigation system. This Article argues that …