Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
- File Type
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Procedure, Politics, Prediction, And Professors: A Response To Professors Burbank And Purcell, Stephen Subrin
Procedure, Politics, Prediction, And Professors: A Response To Professors Burbank And Purcell, Stephen Subrin
Stephen N. Subrin
In this article I comment on four themes in the work of Stephen Burbank and Edward Purcell, two of the leading scholars of American civil procedure and procedural reform: (1) the relationship of substantive and procedural law; (2) the place of politics in procedural reform; (3) the difficulty of reliably predicting consequences of procedural reform; and (4) challenges that the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) and similar reforms present for law professors, both in their roles as researchers and writers, and as teachers of would-be lawyers.
Federal Rules, Local Rules, And State Rules: Uniformity, Divergence, And Emerging Procedural Patterns, Stephen Subrin
Federal Rules, Local Rules, And State Rules: Uniformity, Divergence, And Emerging Procedural Patterns, Stephen Subrin
Stephen N. Subrin
No abstract provided.
Preface: Symposium: The 50th Anniversary Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, 1938-1988, Stephen Subrin
Preface: Symposium: The 50th Anniversary Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, 1938-1988, Stephen Subrin
Stephen N. Subrin
No abstract provided.
Procedure, Politics, Prediction, And Professors: A Response To Professors Burbank And Purcell, Stephen Subrin
Procedure, Politics, Prediction, And Professors: A Response To Professors Burbank And Purcell, Stephen Subrin
Stephen N. Subrin
In this article I comment on four themes in the work of Stephen Burbank and Edward Purcell, two of the leading scholars of American civil procedure and procedural reform: (1) the relationship of substantive and procedural law; (2) the place of politics in procedural reform; (3) the difficulty of reliably predicting consequences of procedural reform; and (4) challenges that the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) and similar reforms present for law professors, both in their roles as researchers and writers, and as teachers of would-be lawyers.
Federal Rules, Local Rules, And State Rules: Uniformity, Divergence, And Emerging Procedural Patterns, Stephen Subrin
Federal Rules, Local Rules, And State Rules: Uniformity, Divergence, And Emerging Procedural Patterns, Stephen Subrin
Stephen N. Subrin
No abstract provided.
How Equity Conquered Common Law: The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure In Historical Perspective, Stephen Subrin
How Equity Conquered Common Law: The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure In Historical Perspective, Stephen Subrin
Stephen N. Subrin
Part I of this Article first looks at the major components of common law and equity procedure, and then examines the domination of an equity mentality in the Federal Rules. Part II explores the American procedural experience before the twentieth century, and demonstrates how David Dudley Field and his 1848 New York Code were tied to a common law procedural outlook. Part III concentrates on Roscoe Pound (who initiated the twentieth century procedural reform effort), Thomas Shelton (who led the American Bar Association Enabling Act Movement), and Charles Clark (the major draftsman of the Federal Rules). Through understanding these men …
Preface: Symposium: The 50th Anniversary Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, 1938-1988, Stephen Subrin
Preface: Symposium: The 50th Anniversary Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, 1938-1988, Stephen Subrin
Stephen N. Subrin
No abstract provided.
Ashcroft V. Iqbal: Contempt For Rules, Statutes, The Constitution, And Elemental Fairness, Stephen Subrin
Ashcroft V. Iqbal: Contempt For Rules, Statutes, The Constitution, And Elemental Fairness, Stephen Subrin
Stephen N. Subrin
We were asked to write about one of the worst United States Supreme Court opinions we had read. My article is about Ashcroft v. Iqbal because it is such an important decision in the field of federal civil litigation and the majority opinion is unsupportable in so many different ways. I explain how that opinion changes the substantive law of supervisory liability for government officials without providing the parties notice that the issue would be considered by the Court. The majority then enshrines fact pleading requirements in federal court for all cases (although denying they have done so), without following …