Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (2)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal (1)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (1)
- Boumediene v. Bush (553 U.S. 723 (2008)) (1)
- Civil Procedure (1)
-
- Combatants (1)
- Courts (1)
- David Hackett Souter (1)
- Discovery (1)
- Dispute resolution (Law) (1)
- Executive Power (1)
- Federal Civil Rules (1)
- Federal Courts (1)
- Federal Pleading (1)
- Habeas Corpus (1)
- International Law (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Military Commissions Act of 2006 (1)
- Public Opinion (1)
- State Courts (1)
- Venues (Law) (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Justice Souter And The Civil Rules, Scott Dodson
Justice Souter And The Civil Rules, Scott Dodson
Faculty Publications
Justice Souter’s recent retirement from the Court after nearly twenty years presents a unique opportunity to comment on his legacy. No doubt others will eulogize or castigate him for his membership in the Planned Parenthood v. Casey troika, but there is much more to the man and his jurisprudence. Indeed, the danger is that Justice Souter will be pigeonholed into one opinion, an opinion that he wrote early in his Supreme Court career, to the detriment of understanding the complex justice that he was. And what it finds is a justice deeply committed to the fair treatment of the litigants …
New Pleading, New Discovery, Scott Dodson
New Pleading, New Discovery, Scott Dodson
Faculty Publications
Pleading in federal court has a new narrative. The old narrative was one of notice, with the goal of broad access to the civil justice system. New Pleading, after the landmark Supreme Court cases of Twombly and Iqbal, is focused on factual sufficiency, with the purpose of screening out meritless cases that otherwise might impose discovery costs on defendants. The problem with New Pleading is that factual insufficiency often is a poor proxy for meritlessness. Some plaintiffs lack sufficient factual knowledge of the elements of their claims not because the claims lack merit but because the information they need is …
The Restrictive Ethos In Civil Procedure, A. Benjamin Spencer
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 …
Public Opinion And State Supreme Courts, Neal Devins, Nicole Mansker
Public Opinion And State Supreme Courts, Neal Devins, Nicole Mansker
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Nationwide Personal Jurisdiction For Our Federal Courts, A. Benjamin Spencer
Nationwide Personal Jurisdiction For Our Federal Courts, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure limits the territorial jurisdiction of federal district courts to that of the courts of their host states.T his limitation is a voluntary rather than obligatory restriction, given district courts' status as courts of the national sovereign. Although there are sound policy reasons for limiting the jurisdictional reach of our federal courts in this manner, the limitation delivers little benefit from a judicial administration or even a fairness perspective, and ultimately costs more to implement than is gained in return. The rule should be amended to provide that district courts have personal …
Talk Loudly And Carry A Small Stick: The Supreme Court And Enemy Combatants, Neal Devins
Talk Loudly And Carry A Small Stick: The Supreme Court And Enemy Combatants, Neal Devins
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.