Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
An Implausible Standard For Affirmative Defenses, Stephen Mayer
An Implausible Standard For Affirmative Defenses, Stephen Mayer
Michigan Law Review
In the wake of Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the federal district courts split over whether to apply Twombly’s plausibility standard to the pleading of affirmative defenses. Initially, a majority of district courts extended Twombly to defense pleadings, but recently the courts that have declined to extend the plausibility standard have gained majority status. This Note provides a comprehensive analysis of each side of the plausibility split, identifying several hidden assumptions motivating the district courts’ decisions. Drawing from its analysis of the two opposing positions, this Note responds to the courts that have applied plausibility pleading …
A Barrier To Child Welfare Reform: The Supreme Court’S Flexible Approach To Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 60(B)(5) And Granting Relief To States In Institutional Reform Litigation, Rachel Dunnington
Seattle University Law Review
In a recent decision, Horne v. Flores, the Court demanded a broader and more flexible application of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (Rule) 60(b)(5). In doing so, the Court opened the door for states to seek relief from court-enforced agreements like consent decrees. This decision undermines the use of institutional reform litigation as a means of fixing the child welfare system and thus deals a further blow to the nation’s most vulnerable citizens. This Note will discuss Horne’s impact on consent decrees stemming from institutional reform litigation in child welfare. Part II will explore the history of Rule 60 as …
The Mandatory Summary Jury Trial In Federal Court: Foundationally Flawed, Nina Jill Spiegel
The Mandatory Summary Jury Trial In Federal Court: Foundationally Flawed, Nina Jill Spiegel
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Protecting The Right Of Citizens To Aggregate Small Claims Against Businesses, Paul D. Carrington
Protecting The Right Of Citizens To Aggregate Small Claims Against Businesses, Paul D. Carrington
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Two years ago I ranted against the Supreme Court's subversion of the Rules Enabling Act and its opposition to the benign aims of the twentieth-century progressive law reformers expressed summarily in Rule 1 of our Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. I observed then that the majority of the Justices of the Supreme Court appeared to have joined the Chamber of Commerce, aligning themselves also with Vice President Dan Quayle's 1989 Council on Competitiveness that denounced effective civil procedure as an enemy of economic development. I was then commenting adversely on what the Court had done to transform Rule 8. I …