Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Selected Works (22)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (13)
- Georgia State University College of Law (11)
- The University of Akron (11)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (10)
-
- William & Mary Law School (8)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (7)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (4)
- University of Arkansas, Fayetteville (4)
- University of Georgia School of Law (4)
- University of Michigan Law School (4)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (4)
- Notre Dame Law School (3)
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (3)
- University of Washington School of Law (3)
- American University Washington College of Law (2)
- Brooklyn Law School (2)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (2)
- Roger Williams University (2)
- Seattle University School of Law (2)
- Singapore Management University (2)
- Southern Methodist University (2)
- UC Law SF (2)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (2)
- University of Miami Law School (2)
- University of Montana (2)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (2)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (2)
- Bellarmine University (1)
- Boston University School of Law (1)
- Keyword
-
- Civil procedure (18)
- Civil Procedure (13)
- Erie Doctrine (11)
- Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins (11)
- Jurisdiction (10)
-
- Constitutional law (9)
- Due process (8)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (8)
- Supreme court (8)
- Class actions (7)
- New york (7)
- Federal courts (6)
- Constitution (5)
- Court (5)
- Federal (5)
- Judicial Process (5)
- New york state constitution (5)
- State (5)
- United states constitution (5)
- City (4)
- Civil rights (4)
- Complex litigation (4)
- Discovery (4)
- Double jeopardy (4)
- Fourteenth amendment (4)
- Transparency (4)
- Appeals (3)
- Appellate (3)
- Civil law (3)
- Courts (3)
- Publication
-
- Akron Law Review (11)
- Georgia Business Court Opinions (11)
- Nevada Supreme Court Summaries (10)
- Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl (9)
- Touro Law Review (9)
-
- All Faculty Scholarship (7)
- Scholarly Works (7)
- Faculty Publications (5)
- Faculty Scholarship (5)
- Arkansas Law Review (4)
- Michigan Law Review (3)
- Washington Law Review (3)
- William & Mary Law Review (3)
- Articles (2)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (2)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (2)
- Journal Articles (2)
- Public Land & Resources Law Review (2)
- Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law (2)
- Scholarly Articles (2)
- Scott Dodson (2)
- Seattle University Law Review (2)
- Testimony (2)
- The Judges' Book (2)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (2)
- Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law (2)
- Adam M. Gershowitz (1)
- Alan J. Meese (1)
- Allison Orr Larsen (1)
- American University Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 163
Full-Text Articles in Law
Between Scylla And Charybdis: Maritime Liens And The Bankruptcy Code, Ian T. Kitts
Between Scylla And Charybdis: Maritime Liens And The Bankruptcy Code, Ian T. Kitts
Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law
Federal courts have had trouble fitting maritime law into the bankruptcy scheme created by the Bankruptcy Code (the Code). Particularly troublesome have been vessel-arrest proceedings that are underway when the vessel’s owner files for bankruptcy. Prior to the enactment of the Code, courts applied the doctrine of custodia legis to decide whether the admiralty or the bankruptcy court would administer the vessel. Since the Code was enacted, courts have generally held that the bankruptcy court gained control. A recent Ninth Circuit decision, however, split with other circuits and seems to have revived custodia legis. This Note argues that the Ninth …
How Much Do Expert Opinions Matter? An Empirical Investigation Of Selection Bias, Adversarial Bias, And Judicial Deference In Chinese Medical, Chunyan Ding
Brooklyn Journal of International Law
This article investigates the nature of the operation and the role of expert opinions in Chinese medical negligence litigation, drawing on content analysis of 3,619 medical negligence cases and an in-depth survey of judges with experience of adjudicating medical negligence cases. It offers three major findings: first, that both parties to medical negligence disputes show significant selection bias of medical opinions, as do courts when selecting court-appointed experts; second, expert opinions in medical negligence litigation demonstrate substantial adversarial bias; third, courts display very strong judicial deference to expert opinions in determining medical negligence liability. This article fills the methodological gap …
A Proposal To Improve Washington's Rules On Ex Parte Contact, Connor Rowinski
A Proposal To Improve Washington's Rules On Ex Parte Contact, Connor Rowinski
Washington Law Review
Privilege doctrines play an important role in allowing clients to confide in their trusted attorneys and doctors. The intersection of two privilege doctrines in medical malpractice litigation—physician-patient privilege and attorney-client privilege—places physicians working at corporate hospitals in a catch-22 of allegiances. On one hand, physicians cannot disclose patient information, whereas on the other, they must assist their employer in defending the case. These concerns are heightened when attorneys seek to communicate with non-party physicians ex parte—that is, unsupervised. In Youngs v. Peacehealth, the Washington State Supreme Court allowed corporate defendants to communicate ex parte with the plaintiff’s treating physician under …
Snapback, Version 2.0: The Best Solution To The Problem Of Snap Removal, Arthur D. Hellman
Snapback, Version 2.0: The Best Solution To The Problem Of Snap Removal, Arthur D. Hellman
Testimony
The forum defendant rule, embodied in 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2), prohibits removal of civil actions based on diversity of citizenship jurisdiction “if any of the parties in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the State in which such action is brought.” Pointing to the phrase “properly joined and served,” defendants have argued that § 1441(b)(2) does not bar removal of a diversity action if a citizen of the forum state has been joined as a defendant but has not yet been served. The stratagem of removing before service to avoid the prohibition of § 1441(b)(2) …
Snapback! A Narrowly Tailored Legislative Solution To The Problem Of Snap Removal, Arthur D. Hellman
Snapback! A Narrowly Tailored Legislative Solution To The Problem Of Snap Removal, Arthur D. Hellman
Testimony
“Snap removal” is a stratagem used by defendants in civil litigation as an end run around the forum defendant rule. That rule, embodied in 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2), prohibits removal of civil actions based on diversity of citizenship jurisdiction “if any of the parties in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the State in which such action is brought.” Focusing on the phrase “properly joined and served,” defendants have argued that § 1441(b)(2) allows removal of a diversity action when a citizen of the forum state has been joined as a defendant but has not …
Issue Classing--The Express Checkout Of Class Actions, Shaquille Grant
Issue Classing--The Express Checkout Of Class Actions, Shaquille Grant
SMU Law Review Forum
No abstract provided.
Civil Practice And Procedure, Christopher S. Dadak
Civil Practice And Procedure, Christopher S. Dadak
University of Richmond Law Review
This Article’s focus and analysis encompasses the past year of Supreme Court of Virginia opinions, legislation, and revisions to the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia affecting Virginia civil procedure.1 This Article is not meant to be all-encompassing, but does endeavor to capture the highlights of changes or analysis regarding Virginia civil procedure. The opinions discussed throughout this Article do not all reflect changes in Virginia jurisprudence on civil procedure, but also address clarifications or reminders from the court on certain issues it has deemed worthy of addressing (and that practitioners continue to raise). The Article first addresses opinions …
Knick V. Township Of Scott, Alizabeth A. Bronsdon
Knick V. Township Of Scott, Alizabeth A. Bronsdon
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Supreme Court overruled a 34-year-old precedent and sparked a sharp dissent by holding that a landowner impacted by a local ordinance requiring public access to an unofficial cemetery on her property could bring a takings claim directly in federal court. The decision eliminated a Catch-22 state-litigation requirement that effectively barred local takings plaintiffs from federal court, but raised concerns about government land use and regulation, judicial federalism, and the role of stare decisis.
The Stealth Revolution In Personal Jurisdiction, Michael H. Hoffheimer
The Stealth Revolution In Personal Jurisdiction, Michael H. Hoffheimer
Florida Law Review
Since 2011 the Roberts Court has decided six personal jurisdiction cases that impose significant new constitutional restrictions on the power of courts and limit plaintiffs’ access to justice. But the Court’s opinions explaining those decisions have repeatedly denied that the Court is altering settled law. This Article argues that the Court is engaged in a stealth revolution, a process of radically changing existing law while claiming to follow controlling precedent. By claiming to rely on precedent, the Court avoids the need to offer a clear rule of decision, fails to explain the policies that motivate its changing approach to personal …
Why Settle For Less? Improving Settlement Conferences In Federal Court, William P. Lynch
Why Settle For Less? Improving Settlement Conferences In Federal Court, William P. Lynch
Washington Law Review
Most cases settle before trial. Recent studies show that approximately 1% of cases filed in federal court go to trial. Alternative dispute resolution processes have been fully incorporated into federal court, and settlement conferences have long been used by federal court judges to control their dockets. Do they provide litigants with both substantive and procedural justice in the vast majority of cases that do not proceed to trial? Lawyers have raised concerns about judicial coercion to settle cases at settlement conferences, the loss of confidentiality that occurs when parties raise claims of bad faith participation at the conference, and that …
State, Bd. Of Architecture V. Dist. Ct., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 49, Melissa Yeghiazarian
State, Bd. Of Architecture V. Dist. Ct., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 49, Melissa Yeghiazarian
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court had two holdings in this case. First, a final decision for purposes of judicial review must contain a detailed finding of facts and conclusions of law by an administrative agency. Second, when a petition for judicial review is filed prematurely, it does not vest jurisdiction in the district court.
Out Of The Quandary: Personal Jurisdiction Over Absent Class Member Claims Explained, A. Benjamin Spencer
Out Of The Quandary: Personal Jurisdiction Over Absent Class Member Claims Explained, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
Since the Supreme Court's decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County, litigants and lower courts have wrestled with the issue of whether a federal court must be able to exercise personal jurisdiction with respect to each of the claims asserted by absent class members in a class action and, if so, what standard governs that jurisdictional determination. This issue is rapidly coming to a head and is poised for inevitable resolution by the Supreme Court in the near future; multiple circuit courts have heard appeals from district courts that have reached varying conclusions on …
Marcus A. Reif V. Aries Consultants, Inc., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 51 (Oct. 10, 2019), Joseph Adamiak
Marcus A. Reif V. Aries Consultants, Inc., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 51 (Oct. 10, 2019), Joseph Adamiak
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that, under NRS 11.258(1), a complaint is only void if it is served without a concurrent filing of attorney affidavit and export report.
Bankruptcy’S Class Act: Class Proofs Of Claim In Chapter 11, Tori Remington
Bankruptcy’S Class Act: Class Proofs Of Claim In Chapter 11, Tori Remington
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
When a business files for protection under Chapter 11 bankruptcy, it must begin to pay off its debt by reorganizing or liquidating its assets. Oftentimes, both processes include terminating employees to reduce the business’s expenditures. As a result of these terminations, former employees might file a “class proof of claim” against the business to preserve any claims of unpaid wages or violations of federal law.
Whether a group may file a class proof of claim against a debtor in bankruptcy remains unclear. The Tenth Circuit has rejected the class proof of claim in bankruptcy. The remaining circuit courts that have …
Righting The Ship: What Courts Are Still Getting Wrong About Electronic Discovery, Tanya Pierce
Righting The Ship: What Courts Are Still Getting Wrong About Electronic Discovery, Tanya Pierce
Faculty Scholarship
What happens when law changes but courts and lawyers ignore the changes? On December 1, 2015, amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure went into effect. One of those amendments includes a sweeping change to Rule 37(e), dealing with the availability of sanctions in federal courts for lost or destroyed electronically stored information (ESI). In the last few years, however, a number of courts have interpreted the amended rule in ways at odds with its plain language and underlying policies, and a surprising number of courts continue to ignore the amended rule altogether. This article examines those trends and …
Brief Of Amici Curiae Employment Law Professors In Support Of Respondents, Sandra F. Sperino
Brief Of Amici Curiae Employment Law Professors In Support Of Respondents, Sandra F. Sperino
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
This Court should not interpret section 1981 to require proof of but-for causation, given that statute’s text, history, and purpose. Although Comcast invokes the canon of statutory construction that Congress intends statutory terms to have their settled common-law meaning, that canon does not apply here. Section 1981 has no statutory text that reflects a common-law understanding of causation. Indeed, in 1866, when Congress enacted the predecessor to section 1981, there was no well-settled common law of tort at all. Rather, just as courts have read 42 U.S.C. § 1982, which shares common text, history and purpose, this Court should read …
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Establishing Climate Change Standing: A New Approach, Ian R. Curry
Establishing Climate Change Standing: A New Approach, Ian R. Curry
Pace Environmental Law Review
Climate change is one of the thorniest political, legal, and economic issues of our time. Therefore, a new legal approach to the issue is required. This Note proposes a streamlined approach for climate change standing, one that assumes injury in fact and causation for a class of discernible climate change harms. A streamlined approach will enable litigants harmed by climate change to seek redress in court, providing an outlet for redress where there has previously been none. Part II of this Note discusses the constitutional doctrine of standing. It begins with a summary of Article III and the logic behind …
Inadvertent Waiver Of The Attorney-Client Privilege By Disclosure Of Documents: An Economic Analysis, Alan J. Meese
Inadvertent Waiver Of The Attorney-Client Privilege By Disclosure Of Documents: An Economic Analysis, Alan J. Meese
Alan J. Meese
No abstract provided.
The Supreme Court's Backwards Proportionaility Jurisprudence: Conparing Judicial Review Of Excessive Criminal Punishments And Excessive Punitive Damages Award, Adam M. Gershowitz
The Supreme Court's Backwards Proportionaility Jurisprudence: Conparing Judicial Review Of Excessive Criminal Punishments And Excessive Punitive Damages Award, Adam M. Gershowitz
Adam M. Gershowitz
No abstract provided.
The Twin Aims Of Erie, Michael S. Green
The Twin Aims Of Erie, Michael S. Green
Michael S. Green
We all remember the twin aims of the Erie rule from first-year civil procedure. A federal court sitting in diversity must use forum state law if it is necessary to avoid 'forum shopping" and the "inequitable administration of the laws." This Article offers a reading of the twin aims and a systematic analysis of their proper role in federal and state court. I argue that the twin aims apply in diversity cases not because they protect state interests, but because they serve the federal purposes standing behind the diversity statute. So understood, they are about separation of powers, not federalism. …
Waiting For Davis V. United States -- Or Not Waiting, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Waiting For Davis V. United States -- Or Not Waiting, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
No abstract provided.
Trivia From The Supreme Court Order List, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Trivia From The Supreme Court Order List, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
No abstract provided.
Responding To The Loss Of An En Banc Quorum (Update: Prawfsblawg Gets Results!?), Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Responding To The Loss Of An En Banc Quorum (Update: Prawfsblawg Gets Results!?), Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
No abstract provided.
One Good Plaintiff Is Not Enough, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
One Good Plaintiff Is Not Enough, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
This Article concerns an aspect of Article III standing that has played a role in many of the highest-profile controversies of recent years, including litigation over the Affordable Care Act, immigration policy, and climate change. Although the federal courts constantly emphasize the importance of ensuring that only proper plaintiffs invoke the federal judicial power, the Supreme Court and other federal courts have developed a significant exception to the usual requirement of standing. This exception holds that a court entertaining a multiple-plaintiff case may dispense with inquiring into the standing of each plaintiff as long as the court finds that one …
Did The Supreme Court Recently Exercise A Power That Had Lain Dormant For Decades?, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Did The Supreme Court Recently Exercise A Power That Had Lain Dormant For Decades?, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
No abstract provided.
Deciding When To Decide - Appellate Procedure And Legal Change, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Deciding When To Decide - Appellate Procedure And Legal Change, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
No abstract provided.
Deferring To Agency Amicus Briefs That Present New Guidance, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Deferring To Agency Amicus Briefs That Present New Guidance, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
No abstract provided.
At&T'S Long Game On Unconscionability, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
At&T'S Long Game On Unconscionability, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
No abstract provided.
At&T V. Concepcion And Adherence To Minority Views, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
At&T V. Concepcion And Adherence To Minority Views, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
No abstract provided.