Law Commons^™

Summary Of In The Matter Of The Estate Of John W. Bowlds, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 100, Kristen T. Gallagher

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An appeal from both parties regarding a court’s review of fee agreements between an estate and its attorneys.

Summary Of State V. Sutton, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 99, Kristen T. Gallagher

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a final judgment from a breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in an employment law case.

Summary Of United Insurance Company Of America Vs. Chapman, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 83, Ryan Hall

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court ruled that the prejudgment interest awarded to Chapman should have been calculated pursuant to the specific interest statute, rather than the general interest statute, because the special interest statute was in effect when the judgment was entered. The district court had erred by awarding the attorney fees to Chapman, because United’s claim was brought on reasonable ground. The award of postjudgment interest awarded to Chapman was also reversed.

Appeal Rates And Outcomes In Tried And Nontried Cases: Further Exploration Of Anti-Plaintiff Appellate Outcomes, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Federal data sets covering district court and appellate court civil cases for cases terminating in fiscal years 1988 through 2000 are analyzed. Appeals are filed in 10.9 percent of filed cases, and 21.0 percent of cases if one limits the sample to cases with a definitive judgment for plaintiff or defendant. The appeal rate is 39.6 percent in tried cases compared to 10.0 percent of nontried cases. For cases with definitive judgments, the appeal filing rate is 19.0 percent in nontried cases and 40.9 percent in tried cases. Tried cases with definitive judgments are appealed to a conclusion on the …

Summary Of Middleton Vs. Warden, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 74, Ryan Hall

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court removed Middleton’s appointed appellate counsel due to substandard representation. On initial review, the Nevada Supreme Court ordered Middleton's counsel to submit an amended brief, limited to 80 pages. Counsel's "amended" brief was simply the original brief with the final few pages removed so as to meet the 80-page requirement. Counsel had repeatedly violated court orders, and the work product he ultimately submitted was unacceptable for representation of a client who was facing a death sentence.

A Survival Guide For Small Businesses: Avoiding The Pitfalls In International Dispute Resolution, Susan Franck

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

In the past decade, the number of small, entrepreneurial businesses participating in the global economy has tripled. With this increase comes a rise in the number of cross-border commercial disputes. The unwary small business, not familiar with international transactions, may commit errors that adversely affect their ability to do and stay in business. This article focuses on analyzing which methods small businesses should use in constructing their dispute resolution provisions and how to avoid errors in drafting and negotiation.

Privacy, Plaintiff, And Pseudonyms: The Anonymous Doe Plaintiff In The Information Age, Jayne S. Ressler

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Curriculum Development At A New Law School: Dismantling The Walls Of Separation, Jeffrey C. Tuomala

Faculty Publications and Presentations

No abstract provided.

The Role Of Opt-Outs And Objectors In Class Action Litigation: Theoretical And Empirical Issues, Theodore Eisenberg, Geoffrey P. Miller

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

How Like A Winter? The Plight Of Absent Class Members Denied Adequate Representation, Susan P. Koniak

Faculty Scholarship

Class actions assume absent class members. ² Notices in class actions tell class members that they need not show up in the courthouse, although they may if they choose.³ Class members are told that class counsel and the named class representatives will look out for them, although if they choose to hire their own lawyer, she may appear on their behalf.⁴ They are also routinely told that once the decision in the class action becomes final they will be bound by it, losing any and all right to protest the resolution of their claims by the class action …

Terminating Calder: "Effects" Based Jurisdiction In The Ninth Circuit After Schwarzenegger V. Fred Martin Motor Co., A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

In Calder v. Jones, the Supreme Court clearly and succinctly determined that personal jurisdiction is appropriate over a defendant whose only contact with the forum state is its intentional actions aimed at and having harmful "effects" in the forum state. Illustrating the extent to which the law of personal jurisdiction had been relaxed from the time of Pennoyer v. Neff and International Shoe Co. v. Washington, Calder also extended the reach of state courts by permitting jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants on the strength of the plaintiffs' connections with the forum state. Although Calder provided a welcome and much …

Summary Of Bohlmann V. Printz, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 62, Z. Ryan Pahnke

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

No abstract provided.

6th Annual Open Government Summit: Access To Public Records Act & Open Meetings Act, 2004, Department Of Attorney General, State Of Rhode Island

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Between 'Merit Inquiry' And 'Rigorous Analysis': Using Daubert To Navigate The Gray Areas Of Federal Class Action Certification, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

In recent years, the class action certification hearing has become the latest forum for disputes over the reliability of expert testimony. Since these hearings may involve complex technical matters, litigants frequently try to introduce expert testimony to either establish or challenge the basic requirements for class certification. Yet, most courts do not conduct a Daubert analysis before admitting expert testimony during certification, evaluate the evidence according to a uniform standard, or adequately weigh opposing expert opinions.

Even though the Federal Rules of Evidence codify procedures to ensure the reliability of expert testimony, courts have been reluctant to employ them during …

Summary Of Pan V. Eighth Judicial District Court, 120 Nev. Adv.Op.No.26, Ronda Heilig

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

When all of the “prerequisites for finality are met, an order that dismisses a case for forum non conveniens is a final judgment that should be reviewed on appeal,”2 and not via a petition for a writ of mandamus.

Brief Of Respondents In Opposition, In Re Green Tree Financial Corp., No. 03-1243 (U.S. Apr. 22, 2004), Cornelia T. Pillard

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Recent Evaluative Research On Jury Trial Innovations, B. Michael Dann, Valerie P. Hans

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

During the past decade, state jury reform commissions, many individual federal and state judges, and jury scholars have advocated the adoption of a variety of innovative trial procedures to assist jurors in trials. Many jury trial reforms reflect growing awareness of best practices in education and communication as well as research documenting that jurors take an active rather than a passive approach to their decision-making task. Traditional adversary jury trial procedures often appear to assume that jurors are blank slates, who will passively wait until the end of the trial and the start of jury deliberations to form opinions about …

Petition For The Redress Of Violations Of Human Rights Guaranteed By The American Declaration Of The Rights And Duties Of Man, Inter-American Commission On Human Rights, Jeffrey C. Tuomala

Faculty Publications and Presentations

No abstract provided.

Discovery Abuse In The State Of Georgia – Just How Bad Is It?, C. Ronald Ellington

Popular Media

How frequently do Georgia lawyers encounter discovery abuse in civil litigation? What are the most prevalent kinds of discovery abuse? Do attorneys who usually represent plaintiffs perceive discovery abuse occurring more often or at about the same rate as attorneys from the defense bar? Is discovery abuse worse in metro-Atlanta than small town Georgia?

Shining A Light In A Dim Corner: Standing To Appeal And The Right To Defend A Judgment In The Federal Courts, Joan E. Steinman

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Place Of Court-Connected Mediation In A Democratic Justice System, Nancy A. Welsh

Faculty Scholarship

A justice system, and the processes located within it, ought to deliver justice. That seems simple enough. But, of course, delivering justice is never so simple. Justice and the systems that serve it are the creatures of context.

This Article considers mediation as just one innovation within the much larger evolution of the judicial system of the United States. First, this Article outlines how the values of democratic governance undergird our traditional picture of the American justice system, presumably because the invocation of such values helps the system to deliver something that will be respected by the nation’s citizens as …

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 …

Summary Of Attorney General V. Nos, 120 Nev. Adv. Op. 11, Christopher W. Carson

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

No abstract provided.

Processing Civil Rights Summary Judgment And Consumer Discrimination Claims, Deseriee A. Kennedy

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Comments On A Class Action Rule For Mississippi Comments, Howard M. Erichson

Faculty Scholarship

In my primary contribution to this Symposium, I address whether Mississippi ought to adopt a class action rule. In that article, I show that the lack of a class action rule prevents neither mass disputes nor mass aggregate litigation. I argue that for some mass disputes, class actions provide a superior mechanism for dispute resolution, and that Mississippi therefore should adopt a rule permitting class actions. There is another important question, however, which is what such a rule should contain if adopted. Indeed, the questions of whether to permit class actions and what a class action rule should contain are …

"Defendant Veto" Or "Totality Of The Circumstances?": It's Time For The Supreme Court To Straighten Out The Personal Jurisdiction Standard Once Again, Robert J. Condlin

Faculty Scholarship

Commentators frequently claim that there is no single, coherent doctrine of extra-territorial personal jurisdiction, and, unfortunately, they are correct. The International Shoe case, commonly (but inaccurately) thought of as the wellspring of the modern form of the doctrine, announced a relatively straightforward, two-factor, four-permutation test that worked well for resolving most cases. In the nearly sixty-year period following Shoe, however, as the Supreme Court expanded and refined the standard, what was once straightforward and uncomplicated became serendipitous and convoluted. Two general, and generally incompatible, versions of the doctrine competed for dominance. The first, what might best be described as …

Federal Common Law In An Age Of Treaties, Michael P. Van Alstine

Faculty Scholarship

In this article Professor Van Alstine explores the interaction between the limitations on the doctrine of federal common law and the power of federal courts to interpret the law within the scope of treaties. The article first reviews the constitutional foundation for the operation of treaties as directly applicable ("self-executing") federal law. It then explains that, notwithstanding the Erie doctrine, federal courts may obtain lawmaking powers from either a delegation by Congress or in certain areas of "uniquely federal interest."

Professor Van Alstine then argues that the judicial relationship with self-executing treaty law in principle proceeds from the same source …

La Revision Del Codigo Civil Y La Responsabilidad Civil Extracontractual: Contradiccion En Los Terminos, 73 Rev. Jur. U.P.R. 981 (2004), Alberto Bernabe

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Rule 11 And Rule Revision, Carl W. Tobias, Margaret L. Sanner

Law Faculty Publications

Numerous observers of modem civil practice, whose views range across a comparatively broad spectrum, consider the 1983 amendment to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 the most controversial revision since the United States Supreme Court promulgated the original Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in 1938.1 Counsel and litigants overused and abused the 1983 modification to Rule 11 by inappropriately stressing the compensatory goal of the proviso and improperly deemphasizing the stricture's deterrence objective. Many judges vigorously enforced Rule 11, often finding violations and imposing burdensome sanctions which frequently included large attorney's fees. This activity of lawyers and parties, as well …

The Story Of Shaffer: Allocating Jurisdictional Authority Among The States, Wendy Collins Perdue

Law Faculty Publications

Shaffer v. Heitner is one of a long series of Supreme Court cases addressing the scope of state-court territorial authority. Indeed, Shaffer is the first of a dozen modern cases that delineated the Court's current conception of the constitutional limits on state-court jurisdictional authority.

Determining whether a court has jurisdiction to hear a dispute is an important preliminary step in any litigation. But the constitutional doctrine the Court has developed in this area is also an interesting window on the Court's more general understanding of the allocation of power among the states.