Law Commons^™

2020 Year-End Report On The Judiciary By The Chief Justice Of The United States, Thomas E. Baker

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Trial Bench Views: Iaals Report On Findings From A National Survey On Civil Procedure, Corina Gerety

Pace Law Review

In the spring of 2010, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (“IAALS”) collected survey data on the American civil justice system from state and federal judges throughout the United States, as part of a joint effort with Northwestern University School of Law’s Searle Center on Law, Regulation, and Economic Growth (“Searle Center”). This report sets forth the collective opinions of respondent judges, as they bear on civil reform proposals developed by IAALS and the American College of Trial Lawyers Task Force on Discovery and Civil Litigation (“ACTL Task Force”).

The Post-Iqbal State Of Pleading: An Argument Opposing A Uniform National Pleading Regime, Mark W. Payne

University of Miami Business Law Review

The U.S. Supreme Court's 2009 decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal placed a squeeze on the once touted liberal Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by requiring judges to consider the veracity of potential plaintiffs' federal claims in light of Iqbal's new heightened pleading standard. This article examines post-Iqbal pleading standards across United States jurisdictions and argues that states should exert caution before choosing to adopt Iqbal's new "plausibility" standard, and if they elect to modify their pleading standards in light of the Iqbal decision, they should also carefully contemplate their method of adoption.

Owner Beware: Osha's Impact On Tort Litigation By Independent Contractors' Injured Employees Against Business Premises Owners, Jon M. Philipson

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lassiter V. Department Of Social Services: Why Is It Such A Lousy Case?, Brooke D. Coleman

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Mass Torts And Due Process, Sergio J. Campos

Vanderbilt Law Review

As the old saying goes, hard cases make bad law. But hard cases also reveal the limits of legal doctrine. In this Article, I turn to a class of hard cases--mass torts--to rethink the law of procedural due process under the Due Process Clause. Mass torts have long perplexed courts and scholars. They include torts caused by asbestos and other toxic chemicals, pharmaceuticals, oil spills, and other mass-produced products and services. The plaintiffs not only suffer significant injuries, but the sheer number of plaintiffs, each with claims that raise unique fact and legal issues, stretch judicial resources to the limit. …

Addressing The "Elephantine Mass" Of Asbestos Cases: Consolidation Versus Inactive Dockets (Pleural Registries) And Case Management Plans That Defer Claims Filed By The Non-Sick, Victor E. Schwartz, Mark A, Behrens, Rochelle M. Tedesco

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Merging Roles: Mass Tort Lawyers As Agents And Trustees, Charles Silver

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Summary Disposition: The Only Way Out Is Through?, Lauran San Roman Guijarro

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Twombly Revolution?, Douglas G.. Smith

Pepperdine Law Review

In Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, the Supreme Court issued a decision that has been described as nothing less than "startling". In a 7-2 decision, the Court provided an interpretation of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that has significantly increased the level of scrutiny that federal courts must apply in determining the sufficiency of the pleadings. While some have characterized the Court's decision as "vague" or poorly-reasoned, this article defends the Twombly decision as both a correct and welcome development in the law regarding the appropriate pleading standard under Rule 8(a). The article argues that the Court's decision is …

The Rise Of The Common Law Of Federal Pleading: Iqbal, Twombly, And The Application Of Judicial Experience, Henry S. Noyes

Villanova Law Review

SINCE 1938, Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Federal Rules or Rules) has set the standard for how much a plaintiff must allege at the outset of a lawsuit in order to avoid dismissal for failure to state a claim. Rule 8 requires that a plaintiff must include in the complaint "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Federal courts developed a well-settled set of principles to apply when deciding whether to dismiss a claim. Among these principles are the following: (1) the plaintiffs factual allegations are accepted …

Private Transfer Fees: Developer Exploitation Or Legitimate Financing Vehicle, Burke T. Ward, Jamie P. Hopkins

Villanova Law Review

A private transfer fee (PTF) is typically created when a developer or homeowner decides to attach a covenant to the title of the home. This covenant, the PTF covenant, attaches the PTF to the real property. These covenants require payment of a fee—typically stated as one percent of the property's sale price—upon each resale or transfer of the property and often survive for a period of ninety-nine years. The recipients or owners of the PTF (PTF beneficiaries) can be almost anyone, including property developers, PTF developers, home owner associations (HOA), private investors, state governments, and non-profit charities. Usually, the PTF …

The Promise Of A Cooperative And Proportional Discovery Process In North Carolina: House Bill 380 And The New State Electronic Discovery Rules, Brian C. Vick, Neil C. Magnuson

Campbell Law Review

Using the experience of the federal courts under the 2006 Amendments as a guide, this Article examines H.B. 380 and the effect it will have on the discovery process in the state courts. Part I of this Article describes the litigation challenges created by the proliferation of ESI. Part II describes the history, structure and substance of the 2006 Amendments, and discusses their impact in the areas of cooperation and the use of proportionality principles in the federal courts. Part III describes the substance and structure of the rules changes encompassed by H.B. 380, and analyzes the effect that they …

Civil Procedure And Contract Law—Contractual Forum-Selection Clauses In Erie Cases: More Than Substance Or Procedure, James C. Mcneal

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

The enforceability of forum-selection clauses is one of the most litigated jurisdictional issues in federal district courts. In a globalized society, forum-selection clauses reduce uncertainty. However, they present unique problems and, although they are liberally enforced by state and federal courts, forum-selection clauses are not always enforced by the forum court. Enforcement of forum-selection clauses is especially complex in diversity actions in federal court.

Forum-selection clauses appear substantive and often have substantive effects; however, they operate procedurally. Federal courts unanimously hold that the validity of a forum-selection clause is a procedural question and therefore the question of validity is decided …