Law Commons^™

Intraportfolio Litigation, Amanda Rose, Richard Squire

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The modern trend is for investors to diversify. Shareholders who own one S&P 500 firm tend to own many of the others as well. This trend casts doubt on the traditional compensation and deterrence rationales for legal rules that hold corporations liable for the acts of their agents. Today, when A Corp sues B Corp (for breach of contract, theft of trade secrets, or any other legal wrong), many of the same shareholders own both the plaintiff and the defendant. For these shareholders, damages just shift money from one pocket to another, minus of course lawyer fees. We offer here …

Non-Prisoner Pro Se Litigation In The United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Kentucky: Analyzing 2004 And 2007 Cases From Filing To Termination, Timothy D. Thompson

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

An Unnecessary Conflict: Bifurcated Civil Trials And States' Need For An Alternate Rule For Alternate Jurors, Craig M. Brunson

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

D Is For Digitize: An Introduction, James Grimmelmann

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Jury Nullification, Race, And The Wire, James M. Keneally

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Convicted By A Sleeping Jury: Harmless Error Or A Challenge To The Integrity Of Our Criminal Justice System, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. 751 (2011), Rhandi Childress

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Barnes-Wallace V. City Of San Diego: "Psychological Injury" And Its Effect On Standing, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. 507 (2011), Andrew Meyer

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Price Of Access To The Civil Courts In Australia: Old Problems And New Solutions - A Commercial Litigation Funding Case Study, Camille Cameron

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

In the past decade litigation funding companies have assumed an increasingly prominent role in commercial litigation and class actions in Australia. The growth of commercial litigation funding is a predictable response to various features of Australia’s costs and fee allocation rules and practices, including the “loser pays” rule, the prohibition on lawyer’s charging contingency fees, the hourly billing practices of lawyers, and the open-ended and unpredictable nature of much civil litigation. This chapter explores the growth of commercial litigation funding in Australia and uses it as a window through which to view how Australia’s costs and fee allocation rules operate …

Evidence Of Ambiguity: The Effect Of Circuit Splits On The Interpretation Of Federal Criminal Law, Julian W. Smith

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

State Secrets Are A Privilege, Not A Right: Can Foreign Victims Of Extraordinary Rendition And Torture Overcome The State Secrets Privilege Using The Alien Tort Statute, Andrew Kingman

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Table Of Contents, Jtaa Editors

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Determining Self-Employment Income For Child Support Purposes: The Massachusetts View Compared With The National View, Jason V. Owens

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Civil Procedure - Intra-Military Immunity Doctrine Applies To Dual Status Technicians - Zuress V. Donley, 606 F.3d 1249 (9th Cir. 2010), J. T. Baker

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Civil Procedure - Supplemental Jurisdiction And The Expansion Of The Independent Basis For Subject Matter Jurisdiction Requirement - Global Naps, Inc. V. Verizon New England, Inc., 603 F.3d 71 (1st Cir. 2010), Randall Gleason

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Strategic Spillovers, Daniel B. Kelly

Journal Articles

The conventional problem with externalities is well known: Parties often generate harm as an unintended byproduct of using their property. This Article examines situations in which parties may generate harm purposely, in order to extract payments in exchange for desisting. Such “strategic spillovers” have received relatively little attention, but the problem is a perennial one. From the “livery stable scam” in Chicago to “pollution entrepreneurs” in China, parties may engage in externality-generating activities they otherwise would not have undertaken, or increase the level of harm given that they are engaging in such activities, to profit through bargaining or subsidies. This …

The Future Of Climate Change Litigation After Aep V. Connecticut, Amanda Leiter, Rick Faulk, Eric Lasker, Mike Myers

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

No abstract provided.

H Is For Harmonization: The Google Book Search Settlement And Orphan Works Legislation In The European Union, Katharina De La Durantaye

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Teach Your Jurors Well: Using Jury Instructions To Educate Jurors About Factors Affecting The Accuracy Of Eyewitness Testimony, Derek Simmonsen

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Asymmetry Of Duty In Criminal Trial Practice, Maureen A. Howard

Articles

Although the American trial system has been likened to an arena in which mental combatants fight “to the death” (the verdict), each warrior similarly skilled and equally committed to vanquishing the other in a forum with formal rules of engagement enforced by a learned and impartial judge, the role of the criminal prosecutor is qualitatively different than that of other advocates. This is because, unlike any other lawyer, a criminal prosecutor has an affirmative duty to the opposing party.

A lawyer who represents an individual client is duty-bound to advance that client’s interests vigorously within the bounds of the law. …

Effective Pre-Trial Motions: Persuading The Judge, Maureen A. Howard

Articles

Victories won in pre-trial motions can significantly affect the direction and outcome of a trial. For this reason, successful trial lawyers prepare for motions with the same thoroughness that they employ for the trial itself. Arguing a motion to a trial judge, however, is different from arguing your case to a jury; to be effective, an advocate needs to be mindful of the difference.

Judges generally resist what they perceive as emotional manipulation, theatrics, or excessive rhetoric. Many judges expect lawyers to cleanly and succinctly argue the facts and the law without employing any appeal to emotion. That being said, …

The Need For Non-Discretionary Interlocutory Appellate Review In Multidistrict Litigation, Andrew S. Pollis

Faculty Publications

Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) is a tool for managing complex litigation by transferring cases with common questions of fact to a single judge for coordinated pretrial proceedings. The subject matter of the cases can run the gamut from airplane crashes to securities fraud to environmental disasters, such as the recent BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Today, about a third of all pending civil cases in federal court are part of the MDL system. A single judge renders all the important legal decisions in each MDL, exerting outsized impact on the parties and on the evolution of the law …

Mismatch: The Misuse Of Market Efficiency In Market Manipulation Class Actions, Charles R. Korsmo

Faculty Publications

Plaintiffs commonly bring two distinct types of claims under Section 1(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: 1) claims of material misrepresentations or omissions; and 2) claims of trade-based market manipulation. Despite the distinctive features of the two types of claims, courts have tended to treat them identically when applying the “fraud on the market” doctrine. In particular, courts have required both types of plaintiffs to make identical showings that the relevant security traded in an “efficient market” in order to gain a presumption of reliance. The reasons for requiring such a showing by plaintiffs in a misrepresentation case …

The Impact Of Third-Party Financing On Transnational Litigation, Cassandra Burke Robertson

Faculty Publications

Third-party litigation finance is a growing industry. The practice, also termed “litigation lending,” allows funders with no other connection to the lawsuit to invest in a plaintiff’s claim in exchange for a share of the ultimate recovery. Most funding agreements have focused on domestic litigation in Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. However, the industry is poised for growth worldwide, and the recent environmental lawsuit brought by Ecuadorian plaintiffs against Chevron demonstrates that litigation funding is also beginning to play a role in transnational litigation.

This article, prepared for a symposium on “International Law in Crisis,” speculates about …

The Elephantine Google Books Settlement, James Grimmelmann

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The genius - some would say the evil genius - of the proposed Google Books settlement was the way it fuses legal categories. The settlement raised important class action, copyright, and antitrust issues, among others. But just as an elephant is not merely a trunk plus legs plus a tail, the settlement was more than the sum of the individual issues it raised. These “issues” were really just different ways of describing a single, overriding issue of law and policy - a new way to concentrate an intellectual property industry.

In this essay, I argue for the critical importance of …

Securities Class Actions As Public Law, James D. Cox

Faculty Scholarship

The Political Economy of Fraud on the Market provides a wide-ranging criticism of and thoughtful reforms for securities class actions....However, both their critique of contemporary class actions and their model of the reforms they propose leave unexamined a good many matters relevant to both the criticism and reform of securities class actions....Bratton and Wachter earn high marks for being less passionate and much more thoughtful than others in the chorus calling for reform; indeed, their observations are among the most thoughtful to be found in this area. Nonetheless, their analysis is incomplete in many important areas, and in addition to …

Getting Good Results For Clients By Building Good Working Relationships With 'Opposing Counsel', John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

Lawyers’ relationships with their “opposing counsel” make a big difference in how well they handle their cases. “Opposing counsel” often do oppose each other, sometimes quite vigorously, though they also regularly cooperate with each other. In the normal course of litigation, lawyers need to cooperate on many procedural matters. In some cases, they also cooperate to achieve their respective clients’ substantive interests. If the lawyers have a bad relationship, the case is likely to be miserable for everyone involved. If they have a good relationship, they are more likely to agree on procedural matters, exchange information informally, take reasonable negotiation …

Most Claims Settle: Implications For Alternative Dispute Resolution From A Profile Of Medical-Malpractice Claims In Florida, Neil Vidmar, Mirya Holman, Paul Lee

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Special Incentives To Sue, Margaret H. Lemos

Faculty Scholarship

In an effort to strengthen private enforcement of federal law, Congress regularly employs plaintiff-side attorneys’ fee shifts, damage enhancements, and other mechanisms that promote litigation. Standard economic theory predicts that these devices will increase the volume of suit by private actors, which in turn will bolster enforcement and encourage more voluntary compliance with the law. This Article challenges the conventional wisdom. I use empirical evidence to demonstrate that special incentives to sue do not dependably generate more litigation. More crucially, when such incentives do work, they often trigger a judicial backlash against the very rights that Congress sought to promote. …

Debate: The Future Of Mass Torts, Sergio J. Campos, Howard M. Erichson

Articles

No abstract provided.

The Rome I Regulation Rules On Party Autonomy For Choice Of Law: A U.S. Perspective, Ronald A. Brand

Articles

This chapter was presented at a conference in Dublin on the (then) new Rome I Regulation of the European Union in the fall of 2009. It contrasts the Rome I rules on party autonomy with those in the United States. In particular, it considers the rules in the Rome I Regulation that ostensibly protect consumers by discouraging party agreement on a pre-dispute basis to the law governing a consumer contract. These rules are compared with the absence of private international law restrictions on choice of forum and choice of law in the United States, even in consumer contracts. The result …