Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Class actions (2)
- Remedies (2)
- Abrogation (1)
- Access to justice (1)
- Appendix of Forms (1)
-
- Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center Inc (1)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal (1)
- Bell Atlantic v. Twombly (1)
- Case law (1)
- Certification (1)
- Civil rights (1)
- Classes (1)
- Compensation (1)
- Conley v. Gibson (1)
- Damages (1)
- Form 18 (1)
- Injunctions (1)
- Judicial intervention (1)
- Judicial restraint (1)
- Justice (1)
- Law reform (1)
- Lawyers (1)
- Litigants (1)
- Mass torts (1)
- Northern District of California (1)
- Opt in (1)
- Opt out (1)
- Patent infringement (1)
- Patent law (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Plausible Pleading In Patent Suits: Predicting The Effects Of The Abrogation Of Form 18, Kyle R. Williams
Plausible Pleading In Patent Suits: Predicting The Effects Of The Abrogation Of Form 18, Kyle R. Williams
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
On December 1, 2015, amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure took effect. The changes included, among other things, the abrogation of the Appendix of Forms, which contained templates for summons, complaints, answers, and other litigation documents. Prior to its abrogation, Form 18—a template for a “Complaint for Patent Infringement”—was widely utilized by patent plaintiffs in crafting infringement complaints. Form 18 was created during the Conley pleading regime, when conclusory allegations were generally sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss. Accordingly, the sample allegations in Form 18 were conclusory and bare-bones in nature. Under Conley, plaintiffs who followed this …
Who Is Responsible For The Stealth Assault On Civil Rights?, Samuel R. Bagenstos
Who Is Responsible For The Stealth Assault On Civil Rights?, Samuel R. Bagenstos
Michigan Law Review
Staszak’s book does a great service in demonstrating the extent of the stealth assault on civil-rights litigation. As Staszak shows, procedural and remedial decisions fly under the public’s radar, but they have exceptionally important consequences. Indeed, one can draw a clear line between judicial decisions on such obscure topics as standing and qualified immunity and the persistent acts of police misconduct that have aroused great public concern in recent months. Any effort to ensure that civil-rights protections make a concrete difference in people’s lives must attend to the procedural and remedial issues Staszak discusses.
Class Action Myopia, Maureen Carroll
Class Action Myopia, Maureen Carroll
Articles
Over the past two decades, courts and commentators have often treated the class action as though it were a monolith, limiting their analysis to the particular class form that joins together a large number of claims for monetary relief This Article argues that the myopic focus on the aggregated-damages class action has led to undertheorization of the other class-action subtypes, which serve far different purposes and have far different effects, and has allowed the ongoing backlash against the aggregated-damages class action to affect the other subtypes in an undifferentiated manner. The failure to confine this backlash to its intended target …
An Opt-In Option For Class Actions, Scott Dodson
An Opt-In Option For Class Actions, Scott Dodson
Michigan Law Review
Federal class actions today follow an opt-out model: absent an affirmative request to opt out, a class member is in the class. Supporters defend the opt-out model as necessary to ensure the viability of class actions and the efficacy of substantive law. Critics argue the opt-out model is a poor proxy for class-member consent and promotes overbroad and ill-defined classes; these critics favor an opt-in model. This bimodal debate—opt out vs. opt in—has obscured an overlooked middle ground that relies on litigant choice: Why not give the class the option to pursue certification on either an opt-out or an opt-in …