Law Commons^™

Jurisdiction Beyond Our Borders: United States V. Alcoa And The Extraterritorial Reach Of American Antitrust, 1909–1945, Laura Phillips Sawyer

Scholarly Works

Chapter in the book Antimonopoly and American Democracy by Daniel A. Crane and William J. Novak, eds., Oxford University Press, 2023.

In 1945, Judge Learned Hand wrote one of the most influential opinions in modern antitrust law. In declaring that the Aluminum Company of America (Alcoa) had illegally monopolized the industry for virgin aluminum and had participated in an illegal international cartel, Hand both revived and extended American antitrust law. The ruling is famous for several reasons: it narrowly defined the relevant market in favor of the government; it expanded the category of impermissible dominant firm conduct; it interpreted congressional …

Claim Preclusion And The Problem Of Fictional Consent, Lindsey Simon

Scholarly Works

The doctrine of claim preclusion promotes fairness and finality by preventing parties from raising claims that already were (or could have been) raised in a prior proceeding. This strict consequence can be imposed only when the litigant received minimal due process protections in the initial proceeding, including notice and direct or indirect participation.

Modern litigation has caused a new problem. In some cases, a party may be precluded from ever raising a claim on the grounds of “fictional consent” to a prior court’s decisionmaking authority. Litigation devices have expanded the potential reach of judgments through aggregation and broad jurisdictional grants, …

Reflections On The Cross-Border Tax Challenges Of The Digital Economy, Walter Hellerstein

Scholarly Works

In this article, Hellerstein discusses common problems confronting national and subnational jurisdictions in addressing the cross-border tax challenges of the digital economy. This article is based on the author's November 21 inaugural lecture as a visiting professor at the Vienna University of Economics and Business.

The Preliminary Injunction Standard In Diversity: A Typical Unguided Erie Choice, David E. Shipley

Scholarly Works

The standard for granting preliminary injunctions in some states is not the same as the preliminary injunction standard that is followed in the federal district courts in the federal circuit where the state is located. For example, the interlocutory injunction standard in Georgia’s superior courts is not as demanding as the preliminary injunction standard in Georgia’s federal courts. Although state and federal courts in Georgia consider four similar factors in deciding whether to grant or deny provisional injunctive relief, a balancing or sliding scale approach can be used in Georgia’s courts; the moving party need not prove all four of …

Making Sense Of Legislative Standing, Matthew I. Hall

Scholarly Works

Legislative standing doctrine is neglected and under-theorized. There has always been a wide range of opinions on the Supreme Court about the proper contours of legislative standing doctrine and even about whether the Court should adjudicate disputes between the other two branches at all. Perhaps owing to these disagreements, the full Court has never articulated a clear vision of the doctrine. While the Court has managed to resolve some cases, it has not achieved the consensus necessary to provide a comprehensive and coherent account of critical doctrinal issues such as what type of injury can give rise to legislative standing …

With Apologies To Paxton Blair, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

Much has been written on the forum non conveniens doctrine, yet I nonetheless believe that recent developments in related areas still enable scholars to offer an original perspective on the subject. In this brief essay, I advance the following thesis: the forum non conveniens doctrine developed in response to a specific set of doctrines and specific social phenomena. The waning of some of those doctrines have diminished though not altogether eliminated the need for forum non conveniens, which always has had a suspect status following Erie’s declaration that there is “no federal general common law.” While it is most certainly …

Asymmetrical Jurisdiction, Matthew I. Hall

Scholarly Works

Most people — and most lawyers — would assume that the U.S. Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review any determination of federal law by an inferior court, whether state or federal. And there was a time when it was so. But the Court’s recent justiciability decisions have created a perplexing jurisdictional gap — a set of cases in which state court determinations of federal law are immune from the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction. The Court has thus surrendered a portion of its supremacy and thereby undermined the policies that underlie its appellate jurisdiction.

In an effort to address this problem, …

The Partially Prudential Doctrine Of Mootness, Matthew I. Hall

Scholarly Works

The conventional understanding of mootness doctrine is that it operates as a mandatory bar to federal court jurisdiction, derived from the "cases or controversies" clause of the United States Constitution, Article III. In two crucial respects, however, this Constitutional model - which was first adopted by the Supreme Court less than 45 years ago - fails to account for the manner in which courts actually address contentions of mootness. First, the commonly-applied exceptions to the mootness bar are not derived from the "cases or controversies" clause and cannot be reconciled with the Constitutional account of mootness. Second, courts regularly consider …

Nonjurisdictionality Or Inequity, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

This short piece, written for the Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy, responds to Professor Scott Dodson's comment on Bowles v. Russell, titled Jurisdictionality and Bowles v. Russell. Dodson proposes to navigate a path between Justice Thomas's majority opinion and Justice Souter's dissent by embracing Thomas's use of mandatory and Souter's argument for deeming appellate deadlines nonjurisdictional. Considering the systemic, equitable policies underlying Rule 4(a)(6) and the prototypical examples distinguishing jurisdictional rules (those delineating classes of cases) from nonjurisdictional claim-processing rules, this nonjurisdictional alternative makes sense. It is the mandatory aspect of Professor Dodson's proposal that concerns me; it leaves no …

The Drafting Process For A Hague Convention On Jurisdiction And Judgments With Special Consideration Of Intellectual Property And E-Commerce, Knut Woestehoff

LLM Theses and Essays

This thesis is a study of the drafting process for the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Judgments. It will be demonstrated why the original goal of a broad treaty was given up in favor of a draft convention that only applies in international cases to exclusive choice of court agreements concluded in civil and commercial matters in the business-to-business setting. The reader will get an understanding of how the participating nations and interest groups influenced the negotiations and modified the outcome of the discussions. Special consideration was given to the matters of intellectual property and e-commerce, which were nearly completely …

Adrift On A Sea Of Uncertainty: Preserving Uniformity In Patent Law Post-Vornado Through Deference To The Federal Circuit, Larry D. Thompson

Scholarly Works

Congress created the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 1982, and granted that court exclusive appellate jurisdiction over civil actions arising under patent law. Congress's primary goals in creating the Federal Circuit were to produce a more uniform patent jurisprudence and to reduce forum shopping based on favorable patent law. But in the 2002 decision of Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Systems, the Supreme Court held that patent counterclaims alone could not create Federal Circuit jurisdiction. This decision not only overruled the Federal Circuit's longstanding jurisdictional rule, but also opened the door for Regional …

Conflict Of Laws In The Enforcement Of Foreign Awards And Foreign Judgments: The Public Policy Defense And Practice In U.S. Courts, Anupama Parameshwaran

LLM Theses and Essays

Public policy is one of the defenses that a court or a party may invoke in order to resist enforcement of an unjust foreign award or judgment. The purpose of this study is to analyze the status of the public policy as a defense to enforcement in the U.S and to examine its success rate. The thesis will contain suggestions to make public policy a more meaningful defense with respect to the enforcement of foreign judgments and its role in bringing about uniformity in the field of foreign judgments will be analyzed.

Balancing Interests: Statute Of Limitations And Repose In Medical Malpractice Cases, Laurie L. Paterson

LLM Theses and Essays

In the 1970s a crisis occurred in the medical malpractice insurance industry. As tort law began to favor plaintiffs, the number and severity of medical malpractice claims increased. Insurance companies inundated with a deluge of claims correspondingly increased their premiums or pulled out of the malpractice insurance industry all together. Some physicians were unable to obtain medical malpractice insurance and others were faced with as much as a 300% rise in insurance premiums. As a result, the medical profession urged states to enact medical malpractice tort reform. Some states’ tort reform included legislation such as award caps, collateral source offset, …

The Recognition And Enforcement Of Foreign Equitable Remedies And Other Types Of Non-Money Judgments In United States And French Courts: A Comparative Analysis, Noele Sophie Rigot

LLM Theses and Essays

Courts of industrialized nations are often faced with adjudication of cases which involve foreign components. It is common for those courts to be asked by individuals or legal entities from a transnational environment to adjudicate with regard to some elements already adjudged in a different legal system as if it were a local judgment. The question that arises is how effects should be given when dealing with prior adjudications. Most countries agree to recognize some effects determined by foreign jurisdictions, as long as those determinations meet standards that guarantee proper integration of the foreign decision into the domestic setting. These …

Choice Of The Applicable Law In United States Maritime Law And The Venezuelan System, Daniel Eric Vielleville

LLM Theses and Essays

International maritime transport is an important means of transport in international trade. The vessels used in international maritime transport face unique dangers which necessitate maritime law that addresses the perils associated with maritime transport. Maritime law concerns many jurisdictions, which creates a special interest for the study of conflict of laws. There are private international maritime laws in addition to multilateral treaties. This paper analyzes the international approach that the United States takes in maritime conflict of laws, and compares it with the Venezuelan system of private international law. Venezuela is a civil law country with old maritime legislation which …

Busting The Hart & Wechsler Paradigm, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

Federal Courts law was once a vibrant area of scholarship and an essential course for intellectually ambitious students. Now its prestige has diminished so much that scholars debate its future in a recent issue of the Vanderbilt Law Review, where even one of its champions calls it (albeit in the subjunctive mood) a “scholarly backwater.” What, if anything, went wrong, and what should Federal Courts scholars do about it? In his contribution to the Vanderbilt symposium, Richard Fallon defends the reigning model of Federal Courts law, an approach to jurisdictional issues that dates from the publication in 1953 of Henry …

Congress's Paramount Role In Setting The Scope Of Federal Jurisdiction, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

Article III presents a conundrum for scholars seeking a coherent explanation of the federal courts' role in our system of government. On the one hand, the framers set up the judiciary as a separate branch with jurisdiction over federal law and other matters of federal interest. They granted federal judges life tenure and undiminishable salary in order to preserve judicial independence from executive and legislative pressure. It is evident from these provisions that the framers saw a need for a strong national judiciary. At the same time, article III explicitly leaves to Congress the decision whether to create any lower …

The Impact Of Substantive Interests On The Law Of Federal Courts, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

The thesis of this Article is that substantive factors exert a powerful and often unrecognized influence over the resolution of jurisdictional issues, and have done so throughout our history. The chief substantive factors at issue are the government's interest iin regulating behavior on the one hand, and the individual's interest in enforcing constitutional restraints upon government on the other. Part I of this Article examines the relationship between jurisdictional rules and substantive consequences, Part II describes the Court's conventional account of federal courts doctrine in terms of jurisdictional policy and institutional roles, and Part III shows that the reasons set …

International Concurrent Jurisdiction: Dealing With The Possibility Of Parallel Proceedings In The Courts Of More Than One Country, Bernd U. Graf

LLM Theses and Essays

This thesis will examine how legal systems deal with the phenomenon of multiple assumptions of jurisdiction over the same dispute. We will first look at public international law rules on jurisdiction, regulating (or not regulating) conflicting states' interests, which will give only modest guidance. In view of those rules, the subsequent chapters will deal with various national laws relating to the possibility of parallel proceedings in the courts of more than one country, and thus the possibility of the emergence of conflicting orders or judgments.

Exclusive Federal Jurisdiction For Implied Rule 10b-5 Actions: The Emperor Has No Clothes, Margaret V. Sachs

Scholarly Works

Courts have long assumed the existence of exclusive federal jurisdiction over private actions implied from section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and rule 10b-5. The result is not only to restrict forum choice for rule 10b-5 claimants but also to generate a host of questions concerning the extent of federal authority: whether rule 10b-5 actions are exempt from the claim and issue preclusive effects of state court decisions; whether state courts can hear defenses and state-created claims that involve rule 10b-5; and whether federal courts can stay rule 10b-5 actions in deference to state court litigation. In …

The Federal Anti-Injunction Statute In The Aftermath Of Atlantic Coast Line Railroad, John Daniel Reaves, David S. Golden

Scholarly Works

Last Term the Supreme Court rendered its decision in Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers. This case involved the present anti-injunction statute, section 2283 of Title 28, which forbids federal court injunction of state court proceedings. Mr. Justice Black, writing for the majority, traced the roots of the statute's predecessor into the "fundamental constitutional independence of the states and their courts." He hinted that the act grew out of concern for constitutional inviolability of a state court's adjudicative process. Mr. Justice Black went on to announce that the anti-injunction statute is absolute; no judicially created exceptions …