Law Commons^™

Inventing Tests, Destabilizing Systems, Kevin M. Clermont, Stephen C. Yeazell

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The U.S. Supreme Court revolutionized the law on pleading by its suggestive Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly and definitive Ashcroft v. Iqbal. But these decisions did more than redefine the pleading rules: by inventing a foggy test for the threshold stage of every lawsuit, they have destabilized the entire system of civil litigation. This destabilization should rekindle a wide conversation about fundamental choices made in designing our legal system.

Those choices are debatable. Thus, the bone this Article picks with the Court is not that it took the wrong path for pleading, but that it blazed a new and unclear …

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

Faculty Scholarship

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 …

Summary Of Foster V. Dingwall, 126 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 5, Anthony R. Sassi

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court clarifies and explains the procedure announced in Huneycutt v. Huneycutt 2 for seeking a remand to the district court to alter, vacate, or otherwise modify or change a district court order or judgment after an appeal to the Supreme Court has been perfected. Additionally, the Court explains that the perfection of the appeal does not toll the six-month period for seeking NRCP 60(b)(2) relief.

Trivia From The Supreme Court Order List, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Deciding When To Decide - Appellate Procedure And Legal Change, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Dictor V. Creative Mgmt. Servs., Llc, 126 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 4, Tenesa S. Scaturro

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal of district court order granting summary judgment.

The Restrictive Ethos In Civil Procedure, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Those of us who study civil procedure are familiar with the notion that federal civil procedure under the 1938 Rules was generally characterized by a "liberal ethos," meaning that it was originally designed to promote open access to the courts and to facilitate a resolution of disputes on the merits. Most of us are also aware of the fact that the reality of procedure is not always access-promoting or fixated on merits- based resolutions as a priority. Indeed, I would say that a "restrictive ethos" prevails in procedure today, with many rules being developed, interpreted, and applied in a manner …

Summary Of Great Basin Water Network V. State Eng’R, 126 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 2, Jason Vanmeetren

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

A 2003 amendment to section 533.3702 of the Nevada Revised Statutes, empowering the State Engineer to postpone taking action on water appropriation applications “[for] municipal use,” applies retroactively to applications filed within one year of the 2003 amendment and does not apply to applications filed more than one year prior the amendment.

Revisiting The Lyons Den: Summers V. Earth Island Institute's Misuse Of Lyons's Realistic Threat Of Harm Standing Test, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In Summers v. Earth Island Institute, 129 S. Ct. 1142 (2009), the majority and dissenting opinions disagreed about how to apply the “realistic threat” test set forth in Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 107 (1983)). According to Justice Scalia’s majority opinion in Summers, the plaintiff organizations did not have standing to obtain injunctive relief because they failed to prove that their members were likely in the near future to hike on government land on which the Forest Service conducted allegedly illegal sales of timber without public notice and comment and that the facts alleged by …

The Changing Shape Of Federal Civil Pretrial Practice: The Disparate Impact On Civil Rights And Employment Discrimination Cases, Elizabeth M. Schneider

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Colon Santos V. Cooperativa De Seguros Multiples Y El Aparente Conflicto Entre Las Doctrinas De La Solidaridad Y La Inmunidad, 79 Rev. Jur. U.P.R. 1091 (2010), Alberto Bernabe

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Integrity And The Incongruities Of Justice: A Review Of Daniel Markovits, A Modern Legal Ethics, Benjamin C. Zipursky

Faculty Scholarship

Daniel Markovits’ recent book, A Modern Legal Ethics: Adversary Advocacy in a Democratic Age, begins by articulating an ethical quandary common to litigators: how can I advocate zealously for a client whose story might not be true and whose causes might not be just? In Markovits’ hands, the dilemmas of the adversary advocate are transformed into a philosophical puzzle about the nature of integrity and the very idea of fidelity to a client. Lawyers face a far more onerous ethical burden than is sometimes recognized, Markovits argues, for the adversary advocate in our legal system is professionally obligated to lie …

Personal Jurisdiction Over Non-Resident Class Members: Have We Gone Down The Wrong Road?, Tanya Monestier

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Marbury V. Madison And The Foundation Of Law, Jeffrey C. Tuomala

Faculty Publications and Presentations

No abstract provided.

The International Criminal Court And The Closure Of The Time-Limited International And Hybrid Criminal Tribunals, Valerie Oosterveld

Law Publications

No abstract provided.

The Irrepressible Influence Of Byrd, Richard D. Freer, Thomas Arthur

Faculty Articles

We set forth four interrelated theses in this article. First, Byrd is the only Supreme Court case since Erie itself to discuss all three of the core interests balanced, expressly or not, in every vertical choice of law case. Second, because Hanna's "twin aims" test ignores two of these three core interests, it cannot adequately serve as the standard for cases under the Rules of Decision Act ("RDA"). This fact is evidenced by the Court's eschewing the twin aims test in cases, like Gasperini, where state and federal interests must be accommodated. Third, as all three opinions in …

What Federal Rulemakers Can Learn From State Procedural Innovations, Seymour Moskowitz

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Clear As Mud: How The Uncertain Precedential Status Of Unpublished Opinions Muddles Qualified Immunity Determinations, David R. Cleveland

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Portraits Of Resistance: Lawyer Responses To Unjust Proceedings, Alexandra Lahav

Faculty Articles and Papers

This Article considers a question rarely addressed: what is the role of the lawyer in a manifestly unjust procedural regime? Many excellent studies have considered the role of the judge in unjust regimes, but the lawyer’s role has been largely ignored. This Article draws on two case studies: that of lawyers representing civil rights leaders during protests in Birmingham, Alabama in 1963 and that of lawyers representing detainees facing military commission proceedings in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. These portraits illuminate the role of the lawyer in a procedurally unjust tribunal operating within a larger liberal legal regime such as our own. …

Civil Procedure Reform In Switzerland And The Role Of Legal Transplants, Samuel P. Baumgartner

Akron Law Faculty Publications

On January 1, 2011, Swiss courts will begin operating under a unified federal code of civil procedure for the first time in the country’s history. This code has been exceedingly long in the making. In this chapter, I use the new code and its history to engage the editors’ claim that the old categories of common law and civil law procedure are crumbling, thus making differences among countries within the common law or civil law world more important than differences across the divide.

First, the new Swiss code of civil procedure includes a number of features that may look like …

A Cinderella Story: ‘Judicial Cooperation In Civil Matters’ Meets The Prince. Review Article Of Eva Storskrubb, Civil Procedure And Eu Law: A Policy Area Uncovered, Helen E. Hartnell

Publications

No abstract provided.

Ashcroft V. Iqbal: How The Supreme Court Rewrote Rule 8 To Immunize High-Level Executive Officials From Post-9/11 Liability (A Plausible Interpretation), Cara Shepley

Maryland Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

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

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 …

The Restrictive Ethos In Civil Procedure, A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

Those of us who study civil procedure are familiar with the notion that federal procedure under the 1938 civil rules was generally characterized by a "liberal ethos," meaning that it was originally designed to promote open access to the courts and to facilitate a resolution of disputes on the merits. Most of us are also aware of the fact that the reality of procedure is not always access-promoting or fixated on merits-based resolutions as a priority. Indeed, I would say that a "restrictive ethos" characterizes procedure today, with many rules being developed, interpreted, and applied in a manner that frustrates …

Iqbal And The Slide Toward Restrictive Procedure, A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

Last term, in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the Supreme Court affirmed its commitment to more stringent pleading standards in the ordinary federal civil case. Although the decision is not a watershed, since it merely underscores the substantial changes to pleading doctrine wrought in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, Iqbal is disconcerting for at least two reasons. First, the Court treated Iqbal’s factual allegations in a manner that further erodes the assumption-of-truth rule that has been the cornerstone of modern federal civil pleading practice. The result is an approach to pleading that is governed by a subjective, malleable standard that permits judges …

The Poor As A Suspect Class Under The Equal Protection Clause: An Open Constitutional Question, Henry Rose

Faculty Publications & Other Works

Both judges and legal scholars assert that the United States Supreme Court has held that the poor are neither a quasi-suspect nor a suspect class under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. They further assert that this issue was decided by the Supreme Court in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973). It is the thesis of this article that the Supreme Court has not yet decided whether the poor are a quasi-suspect or a suspect class under Equal Protection. In fact, the majority in San Antonio Independent School …

Iqbal And Empathy, Darrell A. H. Miller

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay argues that empathy does and should play an important, albeit limited role, in a judge’s decision making process. Specifically, empathy is essential for making correct, principled, and unbiased judgments, because empathy is one of the few means we have to understand human motivation. Empathy is a crucial cognitive mechanism that can help compensate for common cognitive bias. As such, empathy, appropriately restricted, should be an accepted and meaningful tool for judges to use in evaluating the sufficiency of complaints, especially as they relate to Iqbal’s plausibility pleading standard.

All Rise! Standing In Judge Betty Fletcher’S Court, Thomas D. Rowe Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

In this essay, based on a talk given at the Washington Law Review’s March 2009 symposium in honor of Senior Ninth Circuit Judge Betty Binns Fletcher and her three decades of service on that court, I selectively survey her opinions on justiciability issues: standing, ripeness, mootness, and political questions. A significant starting point for this survey is Professor Richard Pierce’s 1999 law review article, Is Standing Law or Politics?, arguing that many Supreme Court votes in standing cases generally, and appellate judges’ votes in environmental-standing cases specifically, can be explained better on the basis of politics than by reference to …

If We Don’T Get Civil Gideon: Trying To Make The Best Of The Civil-Justice Market, Thomas D. Rowe Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

This article considers what market-oriented or market-regulation approaches might be most practical and helpful in trying to satisfy unmet civil legal-service needs and how much it appears that such approaches may be able to succeed in doing so.