Law Commons^™

Exploring Federal Diversity Jurisdiction: Testimony In Front Of The House Of Representatives Committee On The Judiciary, Subcommittee On The Constitution And Civil Justice, Ronald Weich

All Faculty Scholarship

Good morning Chairman Franks, Ranking Member Cohen and members of the Subcommittee. My name is Ronald Weich and I am the dean of the University of Baltimore School of Law. Thank you for the opportunity to testify at this hearing entitled “Exploring Federal Diversity Jurisdiction.”

The subject of today’s hearing is technical, complex, little-understood by the general public, and yet fundamental to the administration of justice in this country. Federal diversity jurisdiction touches on profound questions of federalism, state sovereignty and the proper functioning of the federal courts.

The Federal Rules At 75: Dispute Resolution, Private Enforcement Or Decision According To Law?, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

This essay is a critical response to the 2013 commemorations of the 75th anniversary of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were introduced in 1938 to provide procedure to decide cases on their merits. The Rules were designed to replace decisions under the “sporting theory of justice” with decisions according to law. By 1976, at midlife, it was clear that they were not achieving their goal. America’s proceduralists split into two sides about what to do.

One side promotes rules that control and conclude litigation: e.g., plausibility pleading, case management, limited discovery, cost indemnity …

Civilizing American Civil Justice: International Insights, James Maxeiner, Gyooho Lee, Armin Weber

All Faculty Scholarship

In 1776, when Americans declared independence from Britain, they also declared their rights. Their declarations of rights count “open courts” as among the best means for constitutional development. Open courts should secure to every man, without regard to wealth, a just remedy for every wrong suffered, according to the law of the land, by fair and speedy procedure.

Since 1776 Americans have invested heavily in creating open courts. They have been disappointed by returns that fall “far short of perfection” (Maurice Rosenberg). They have found reform to be an “unending effort to perfect the imperfect” (Jay Tidmarsh).

That Americans have …

The American "Rule": Assuring The Lion His Share, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

Court costs in American civil procedure are allocated to the loser (“loser pays”) as elsewhere in the world. When American civil procedure took shape in the 1840s, American lawyers thought that losing parties ought to indemnify winning parties against all expenses of lawsuits. Yet today, attorneys’ fees – the lion’s share of expenses in the words of the General Report – are not allocated this way. By practice – and not by legal rule – attorneys’ fees fall on the parties that incur them. Those fees are not set by statute or court decision, but by agreement between parties and …

Pleading And Access To Civil Procedure: Historical And Comparative Reflections On Iqbal, A Day In Court And A Decision According To Law, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

The Iqbal decision confirms the breakdown of contemporary American civil procedure. We know what civil procedure should do, and we know that our civil procedure is not doing it. Civil procedure should facilitate determining rights according to law. It should help courts and parties apply law to facts accurately, fairly, expeditiously and efficiently. This article reflects on three historic American system failures and reports a foreign success story.

Pleadings can help courts do what we know courts should do: decide case on the merits, accurately, fairly, expeditiously and efficiently. Pleadings facilitate a day in court when focused on deciding according …

It's The Law! Applying The Law Is The Missing Measure Of Civil Law / Common Law Convergence, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

It’s the Law! The application of law to facts is a measure of convergence of common and civil law systems of civil procedure that is missing from our program. The previous session addressed “Getting Straight to the Facts” and “Getting Results.” Facts and results are fine, but what of the law and of its application? Should not applying law have pride of place in systems of civil justice? Should not it be the measure of convergence?

The measure of convergence that I propose is whether methods of applying law to facts are converging. Applying law to facts is the principal …

Imagining Judges That Apply Law: How They Might Do It, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

"Judges should apply the law, not make it." That plea appears perennially in American politics. American legal scholars belittle it as a simple-minded demand that is silly and misleading. A glance beyond our shores dispels the notion that the American public is naive to expect judges to apply rather than to make law.

American obsession with judicial lawmaking has its price: indifference to judicial law applying. If truth be told, practically we have no method for judges, as a matter of routine, to apply law to facts. Our failure leads American legal scholars to question whether applying law to facts …

Legal Methods As A Point Of Reference For Comparative Studies Of Procedural Law, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

This paper addresses the importance of comparative legal methods for study of comparative procedure.

Legal Indeterminacy Made In America: American Legal Methods And The Rule Of Law, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

The thesis of this Article is that the indeterminacy that plagues American law is "Made in America." It is not inherent in law. Rather, it is a product of specific choices of legal methods and of legal structures made in the American legal system.

Teaching First-Year Civil Procedure And Other Introductory Courses By The Problem Method, Stephen J. Shapiro

All Faculty Scholarship

I have been teaching the first-year course in Civil Procedure for twenty years, first for five years at Ohio Northern University, and for the last fifteen years at the University of Baltimore, where I also teach a required second-year course in Evidence. When I first started teaching Civil Procedure, I used a fairly typical case method. I was never very happy with this approach for teaching a course in which one of my major goals was getting the students to learn to read, interpret and apply the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Federal Rules”). Gradually, I began to develop sets …

Civil Justice Reform In The United States — Opportunity For Learning From 'Civilized' European Procedure Instead Of Continued Isolation?, Ernst C. Stiefel, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

This article reports on present and past efforts at civil justice reform in the United States and assesses the opportunities for learning from Continental models. European jurists have long urged that their American colleagues consider using continental approaches in dealing with the serious problems that afflict the American system of civil justice. A few years back, our colleague Kötz noted that "If there is a desire to reform American civil procedure, either by making changes within the adversary system or by developing alternative methods of dispute resolution, the Continental experience may be well worth studying."

Defining “Co-Party” Within Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 13(G): Are Cross-Claims Between Original Defendants And Third-Party Defendants Allowable?, John Bessler

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

1992: High Time For American Lawyers To Learn From Europe, Or Roscoe Pound's 1906 Address Revisited, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

Shows how the key points Roscoe Pound made in his famous law reform address point to foreign law study for future reform.