Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Discovering Discovery: Non-Party Access To Pretrial Information In The Federal Courts 1938-2006, Seymour Moskowitz
Discovering Discovery: Non-Party Access To Pretrial Information In The Federal Courts 1938-2006, Seymour Moskowitz
Law Faculty Publications
In the modern era, the pretrial process is critical to the disposition of almost all litigation. The vast majority of cases never go to trial. Those which are contested at trial and upon appeal are often decided upon the results of the information gather before trial. This is true in both private litigation and in public interest cases where "private attorneys general" may only function effectively with court-enforced discovery. Despite the significance of the Article III courts to our society, transparency in their processes for resolving civil disputes has been severely compromised. Threats to openness emanate from multiple sources. This …
Assessing The Revised Arizona Local Rules Of Federal Procedure, Carl W. Tobias
Assessing The Revised Arizona Local Rules Of Federal Procedure, Carl W. Tobias
Law Faculty Publications
The United States District Court for the District of Arizona has generally not contributed to a significant difficulty with modem federal court practice: local procedural proliferation. Each of the remaining ninety-three federal district courts has prescribed and applied numerous local strictures that govern admiralty, bankruptcy, civil, criminal and evidentiary practice, while mounting numbers of these local provisos conflict with or repeat analogous federal rules or statutes. In contrast, the United States District Court for the District of Arizona has promulgated and enforced relatively few local measures, and only a tiny percentage of them are redundant or inconsistent with corresponding federal …
Reassessing The Purposes Of Federal Question Jurisdiction, John F. Preis
Reassessing The Purposes Of Federal Question Jurisdiction, John F. Preis
Law Faculty Publications
For ages, judges and legal academics have claimed that federal question jurisdiction has three purposes: to provide litigants with a judge experienced in federal law, to protect litigants from state court hostility toward federal claims, and to preserve uniformity in federal law. Because federal claims, for the most part, have always been cognizable in state courts, these purposes imply that state courts are less experienced, more hostile, and more likely to adjudicate federal law in ways that decrease the uniformity of federal law. Despite the ongoing allegiance to this conception of federal question jurisdictionand by implication, state court adjudication of …