Law Commons^™

Trouble On The Exchanges — Does The United Owe Billions To Health Insurers?, Nicholas Bagley

Articles

Yet another bruising fight has erupted over health care reform. On September 9, 2016, the Obama administration offered to open settlement negotiations with health insurers that have sued the United States to recover billions of dollars that they claim they are owed. Congressional Republicans are incensed, believing that any settlement would illegally squander taxpayer dollars in a lastgasp effort to save the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

Is The Supreme Court Disabling The Enabling Act, Or Is Shady Grove Just Another Bad Opera?, Robert J. Condlin

Faculty Scholarship

After seventy years of trying, the Supreme Court has yet to agree on whether the Rules Enabling Act articulates a one or two part standard for determining the validity of a Federal Rule. Is it enough that a Federal Rule regulates “practice and procedure,” or must it also not “abridge substantive rights”? The Enabling Act seems to require both, but the Court is not so sure, and the costs of its uncertainty are real. Among other things, litigants must guess whether the decision to apply a Federal Rule in a given case will depend upon predictable ritual, judicial power grab, …

Tenure Wars: The Litigation Continues, Charles J. Russo

Educational Leadership Faculty Publications

Teacher tenure is a controversial topic that continues to generate litigation. Parents and advocates of educational reform have filed claims alleging, in part, that school officials violate the rights of students who are not achieving academically largely because of the ineffective instruction the students receive from teachers.

Typically, these suits also claim that conditions in districts where students perform poorly on academic measures are exacerbated by the protection that state tenure laws—in conjunction with union efforts—afford ineffective teachers, thereby making it difficult to dismiss the teachers for incompetence.

In North Carolina Association of Educators v. State (2016), a North Carolina …

A Study Of The Costs Of Legal Services In Personal Injury Litigation In Ontario: Final Report, Allan C. Hutchinson

Commissioned Reports, Studies and Public Policy Documents

Contingency Fee Agreements (CFAs) are now a fixed feature of the Ontario litigation landscape. However, little research or study has been done on exactly how they operate in practice, whether they advance the objectives that they were intended to achieve, and whether litigants are best served by the current arrangements. In this study, I intend to make a preliminary start to that research, set out some tentative criticisms of the CFA system as it currently operates, and, where appropriate, suggest preliminary proposals for change.

It should be said at the outset that my efforts to obtain real and serious data …

Whose Law Of Personal Jurisdiction? The Choice Of Law Problem In The Recognition Of Foreign Judgements, Tanya Monestier

Law Faculty Scholarship

It is black-letter law that in order to recognize and enforce a foreign judgment, the rendering court must have had personal jurisdiction over the defendant. While the principle is clear, it is an open question as to whose law governs the question of personal jurisdiction: that of the rendering court or that of the recognizing court. In other words, is the foreign court's jurisdiction over the defendant governed by foreign law (the law of F1), domestic law (the law of F2), or some combination thereof? While courts have taken a number of different approaches, it seems that many courts regard …

Rjr Nabisco And The Runaway Canon, Maggie Gardner

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In last Term’s RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. European Community, the Court finished transforming the presumption against extraterritoriality from a tool meant to effectuate congressional intent into a tool for keeping Congress in check. In the hands of the RJR Nabisco majority, the presumption has become less a method for interpreting statutes than a pronouncement on the proper scope of access to U.S. courts, a pronouncement that Congress must labor to displace. Besides the worrisome implications for separation of powers, the majority’s opinion was also disappointing on practical grounds. By applying the presumption too aggressively, the Court missed an opportunity to …

Trending @ Rwu Law: Professor Niki Kuckes's Post: Video Highlights Litigation Academy: September 20, 2016, Niki Kuckes

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

The Reduced Form Of Litigation Models And The Plaintiff's Win Rate, Jonah B. Gelbach

All Faculty Scholarship

In this paper I introduce what I call the reduced form approach to studying the plaintiff's win rate in litigation selection models. A reduced form comprises a joint distribution of plaintiff's and defendant's beliefs concerning the probability that the plaintiff would win in the event a dispute were litigated; a conditional win rate function that tells us the actual probability of a plaintiff win in the event of litigation, given the parties' subjective beliefs; and a litigation rule that provides the probability that a case will be litigated given the two parties' beliefs. I show how models with very different-looking …

Revisiting Eisenberg And Plaintiff Success: State Court Civil Trial And Appellate Outcomes, Michael Heise, Martin T. Wells

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Despite what Priest-Klein theory predicts, in earlier research on federal civil cases, Eisenberg found an association between plaintiff success in pretrial motions and at trial. Our extension of Eisenberg’s analysis 20 years later into the state court context, however, does not uncover any statistically significant association between a plaintiff’s success at trial and preserving that trial victory on appeal. Our results imply that a plaintiff’s decision to pursue litigation to a trial court conclusion is analytically distinct from the plaintiff’s decision to defend an appeal of its trial court win brought by a disgruntled defendant. We consider various factors that …

Newsroom: Good Reason For Secrecy On 38 Studios 8/12/2016, Niki Kuckes, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

An Event Study Of Patent Verdicts And Judicial Leakage, Bryan Engelhardt, Zachary Fernandes

Economics Department Working Papers

To check for the impartiality of the United States judicial system, we investigate whether judicial decisions are leaked prior to their public release. Utilizing an event study methodology, we test for leaked information by analyzing the effect of patent infringement verdicts on the stock prices of the firms involved before and after the public release of the verdict. We find evidence that at least some of the decisions are leaked prior to their public release.

Newsroom: Kuckes On Discovery Ruling 7-7-2016, Sheri Qualters, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

The Golden Ratio Of Corporate Deal-Making, Christina M. Sautter

Journal Articles

The article discusses the Delaware Supreme Court's decision in the case 'Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings Inc.' in which the court sale of corporate control, the target's board of directors has a duty to maximize stockholder value. Topics discussed include relationship between the deal protection devices and sale process; golden ratio of corporate deal-making; and the court's definition of an ideal merger and acquisition of a sale process.

Sex, Videos, And Insurance: How Gawker Could Have Avoided Financial Responsibility For The $140 Million Hulk Hogan Sex Tape Verdict, Christopher French

Journal Articles

On March 18, 2016, and March 22, 2016, a jury awarded Terry Bollea (a.k.a Hulk Hogan) a total of $140 million in compensatory and punitive damages against Gawker Media for posting less than two minutes of a video of Hulk Hogan having sex with his best friend’s wife. The award was based upon a finding that Gawker intentionally had invaded Hulk Hogan’s privacy by posting the video online. The case has been receiving extensive media coverage because it is a tawdry tale involving a celebrity, betrayal, adultery, sex, and the First Amendment. The case likely will be remembered by most …

Sexual Harassment In Schools, Charles J. Russo

Educational Leadership Faculty Publications

Eliminating sexual harassment in schools continues to be a national concern. In fact, the Supreme Court has resolved three major cases on this topic, and lower courts continue to resolve a steady stream of disputes. The litigation has moved beyond teacher–student and peer–peer claims to include disputes over harassment because of actual or perceived sexual orientation.

Newsroom: New York Times: Teitz On Touro Synagogue 5-16-2016, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Aggregation By Acquisition: Replacing Class Actions With A Market For Legal Claims, Minor Myers, C. Korsmo

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Meeting The Needs Of Student Parents, Charles J. Russo, Rabiah Gul

Educational Leadership Faculty Publications

In addition to the struggles teenage parents and their children face, in 2010, teen childbearing also costs taxpayers between $9.4 and $28 billion a year for such expenditures as public assistance payments, lost tax revenue, and public healthcare, foster care, and schooling, according to the Department of Health and Human Services (United States Department of Health and Human Services 2016). In light of the budgeting and social costs of teenage pregnancies and parenting, this is an issue about which educational leaders should be aware.

Class Warfare: Why Antitrust Class Actions Are Essential For Compensation And Deterrence, Robert H. Lande

All Faculty Scholarship

Recent empirical studies demonstrate five reasons why antitrust class action cases are essential: (1) class actions are virtually the only way for most victims of antitrust violations to receive compensation; (2) most successful class actions involve collusion that was anticompetitive; (3) class victims’ compensation has been modest, generally less than their damages; (4) class actions deter significant amounts of collusion and other anticompetitive behavior; and (5) anticompetitive collusion is underdeterred, a problem that would be exacerbated without class actions. Unfortunately, a number of court decisions have undermined class action cases, thus preventing much effective and important antitrust enforcement.

Antitrust Balancing, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

Antitrust litigation often confronts situations where effects point in both directions. Judges sometimes describe the process of evaluating these factors as “balancing.” In its e-Books decision the Second Circuit believed that the need to balance is what justifies application of the rule of reason. In Microsoft the D.C. Circuit stated that “courts routinely apply a…balancing approach” under which “the plaintiff must demonstrate that the anticompetitive harm…outweighs the procompetitive benefit.” But then it decided the case without balancing anything.

The term “balancing” is a very poor label for what courts actually do in these cases. Balancing requires that two offsetting effects …

Occam's Phaser: Making Proportional Discovery (Finally) Work In Litigation By Requiring Phased Discovery, Michael Thomas Murphy

All Faculty Scholarship

This is an article about solving the problem of expensive electronic discovery in litigation by simply learning the most important facts first. Judges and parties often complain that the scope of information included in fact discovery in civil litigation is overinclusive and disproportionate to size of the dispute, resulting in overly expensive costs. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure recently changed again to further emphasize the use of “proportional” limits in discovery, but provide little practical mechanism for parties, lawyers, and judges to make discovery “right-sized.” This Article proposes that parties should be required to “phase” discovery by first setting …

Standing For (And Up To) Separation Of Powers, Kent H. Barnett

Scholarly Works

The U.S. Constitution requires federal agencies to comply with separation-of-powers (or structural) safeguards, such as by obtaining valid appointments, exercising certain limited powers, and being sufficiently subject to the President’s control. Who can best protect these safeguards? A growing number of scholars call for allowing only the political branches — Congress and the President — to defend them. These scholars would limit or end judicial review because private judicial challenges are aberrant to justiciability doctrine and lead courts to meddle in minor matters that rarely effect regulatory outcomes.

This Article defends the right of private parties to assert justiciable structural …

A Comprehensive Theory Of Civil Settlement, J. J. Prescott, Kathryn E. Spier

Articles

A settlement is an agreement between parties to a dispute. In everyday parlance and in academic scholarship, settlement is juxtaposed with trial or some other method of dispute resolution in which a third-party factfinder ultimately picks a winner and announces a score. The “trial versus settlement” trope, however, represents a false choice; viewing settlement solely as a dispute-ending alternative to a costly trial leads to a narrow understanding of how dispute resolution should and often does work. In this Article, we describe and defend a much richer concept of settlement, amounting in effect to a continuum of possible agreements between …

District Court: Cambridge Univ. Pr. Et Al. V. Becker Et Al.: Ruling On Remand (2016), Orinda Evans

Georgia State University Copyright Lawsuit

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: Ap: Chung On 38 Studios Settlement 03-14-2016, Michelle R. Smith, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: Logan On Kenneth Feinberg 03-12-2016, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Trending @ Rwu Law: Dean Yelnosky's Post: United States Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims Visits Rwu Law: 03-03-2016, Michael Yelnosky

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

Redundant Public-Private Enforcement, Zachary D. Clopton

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Redundancy is a four-letter word. According to courts and scholars, redundant litigation is costly, unfair, and confounding. Modern civil procedure has a (nearly) maximalist preference for centralization, and various rules seek to limit duplicative suits within and across court systems. This seemingly dominant view stands in marked contrast to the reality of the modern regulatory state. Redundant public-private enforcement, in which public and private actors have overlapping authority to enforce the law, is ubiquitous. Redundant enforcement also is noticeably underrepresented in the substantial literature on private and public enforcement, which typically treats government agencies and private attorneys general as substitutes …

Nebraska Court Opinions Move Online Only, Marcia L. Dority Baker, Richard Leiter

Marvin and Virginia Schmid Law Library

Change has come to the state of Nebraska in a digital way. Beginning January 1, 2016, the official opinions of the Nebraska Supreme Court and the Nebraska Court of Appeals are available online only, a change which improves users’ ability to search these opinions. Now users can search all Nebraska Supreme Court opinions from 1871 through the present day and all Nebraska Court of Appeals opinions since its creation in 1992. Prior to this change, opinions were made available in print and the current opinions were available on the Court’s website. Both the public and legal community can access court …

Transnational Litigation As A Prisoner's Dilemma, Maya Steinitz, Paul Gowder

Faculty Scholarship

In this Article we use game theory to argue that perceptions of widespread corruption in the judicial processes in developing countries create ex ante incentives to act corruptly. It is rational (though not moral) to preemptively act corruptly when litigating in the courts of many developing nations. The upshot of this analysis is to highlight that, contrary to judicial narratives in individual cases — such as the (in)famous Chevron–Ecuador dispute used herein as an illustration — the problem of corruption in transnational litigation is structural and as such calls for structural solutions. The article offers one such solution: the establishment …