Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

PDF

Scott Dodson

Bowles

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Complexity Of Jurisdictional Clarity, Scott Dodson Feb 2011

The Complexity Of Jurisdictional Clarity, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

The ideal of clear and simple jurisdictional rules seems like a no-brainer. Clarity in areas of subject-matter jurisdiction generally reduces the cost of litigating those issues and thus preserves litigant and judicial resources for the merits of a dispute. As a result, scholars and justices regularly promote the rhetoric of jurisdictional clarity. Yet no one has probed that rhetoric or reconciled it with the reality of subject-matter jurisdiction doctrine, which is anything but clear and simple. This Article begins to fill that gap, and, in the process, shifts the perspective of existing conversations between rules and standards and between mandates …

Go to article

Hybridizing Jurisdiction, Scott Dodson Dec 2010

Hybridizing Jurisdiction, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

Federal jurisdiction—the “power” of the court—is seen as something separate and unique. As such, it has a litany of special effects that define jurisdictionality as the antipode of nonjurisdictionality. The resulting conceptualization is that jurisdictionality and nonjurisdictionality occupy mutually exclusive theoretical and doctrinal space. In a recent Article in Stanford Law Review, I refuted this rigid dichotomy of jurisdictionality and nonjurisdictionality by explaining that nonjurisdictional rules can be “hybridized” with any—or even all—of the attributes of jurisdictionality.
This Article drops the other shoe. Jurisdictional rules can be hybridized, too. Jurisdictional rules can be hybridized with nonjurisdictional features in myriad forms. …

Go to article

Justice Souter And The Civil Rules, Scott Dodson Dec 2009

Justice Souter And The Civil Rules, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

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. This short essay therefore analyzes a unique set of opinions—those that he authored on the federal …

Go to article

Mandatory Rules, Scott Dodson Dec 2007

Mandatory Rules, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

Whether a limitation is jurisdictional or not is an important but often obscure question. In an Article forthcoming in Northwestern University Law Review, I proposed a framework for courts to resolve the issue in a principled way, but I left open the next logical question: what does it mean if a rule is characterized as nonjurisdictional? Jurisdictional rules generally have a clearly defined set of traits: they are not subject to equitable exceptions, consent, waiver, or forfeiture; they can be raised at any time; and they can be raised by any party or the court sua sponte. This jurisdictional rigidity …

Go to article

Appreciating Mandatory Rules: A Reply To Critics, Scott Dodson Dec 2007

Appreciating Mandatory Rules: A Reply To Critics, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

This short essay, replying to the responses of Professors Burch and Dane and Mr. Poor, address their critiques of my original essay, "Jurisdictionality and Bowles v. Russell."

Go to article

The Failure Of Bowles V. Russell, Scott Dodson Dec 2007

The Failure Of Bowles V. Russell, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

Last term, the Supreme Court decided Bowles v. Russell—perhaps the year’s most underrated case—which characterized the time to file a civil notice of appeal as jurisdictional and therefore not subject to equitable excuses for noncompliance. In so holding, the Court overstated the supporting precedent, inflated the jurisdictional importance of statutes, and undermined an important recent movement to clarify when a rule is jurisdictional and when it is not. This did not have to be. The Court missed a golden opportunity to chart a middle course—holding the rule mandatory but nonjurisdictional—that would have been more consistent with precedent while resolving the …

Go to article

Jurisdictionality And Bowles V. Russell, Scott Dodson Jul 2007

Jurisdictionality And Bowles V. Russell, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

When is a limitation “jurisdictional,” and when is it not? Litigators encounter these questions all the time in statutory coverage issues, in time limitations, and in a host of other preconditions. They are critical, for jurisdictional limitations are not subject to waiver or equitable exceptions, may be raised at any time, and obligate courts to monitor and raise them sua sponte. In Bowles v. Russell, the Court held that the statutory time limitation for filing a notice of appeal is jurisdictional. This essay critiques Bowles, predicts some of the difficulties that it might cause, and offers a better approach.

Go to article