Law Commons^™

Machine Learning And The New Civil Procedure, Zoe Niesel

Faculty Articles

There is an increasing emphasis in the legal academy, the media, and the popular consciousness on how artificial intelligence and machine learning will change the foundations of legal practice. In concert with these discussions, a critical question needs to be explored-As computer programming learns to adjust itself without explicit human involvement, does machine learning impact the procedural practice of law? Civil procedure, while sensitive to technology, has been slow to adapt to change. As such, this Article will explore the impact that machine learning will have on procedural jurisprudence in two significant areas-service of process and personal jurisdiction.

The Article …

One Percent Procedure, Brooke D. Coleman

Faculty Articles

Political rhetoric about the one percent is pervasive, as those with the greatest concentrated wealth prosper and the remaining population stagnates. Because of their affluence, the one percent exercise disproportionate control over political and economic systems. This Article argues that federal civil procedure is similarly a one percent regime. The creme de la creme of the bench and bar, along with equally exclusive litigants, often engage in high-stakes, complex civil litigation. It is this type of litigation that dominates both the elite experience and the public perception of what civil litigation is. This litigation is not particularly common, however; while …

The Dilemma Of Interpreting Rules Of Civil Procedure: A Proposal For Elastic Formalism, L Wayne Scott

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

False Security: How Courts Have Improperly Rendered The Protections Of The Protective Order Illusory, Ramona L. Lampley

Faculty Articles

The protective order is perhaps one of the most useful and “taken for granted” discovery devices contemplated by the Colorado and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The purpose of a joint protective order in civil litigation is to permit the parties to produce business information without fear that the information will be disseminated publicly, and with a court order that the information be used only for purposes of the present litigation. Blanket protective orders serve the interests of a just, speedy, and less expensive determination of complex disputes by alleviating the need for and delay occasioned by extensive and repeated …

Federal Rules Update: How Rules Are Made: A Brief Review, David A. Schlueter

Faculty Articles

A number of amendments to the Federal Rules of Procedure and Evidence became effective on December 1, 2009. The change to Criminal Rule 7 deleted subdivision (c)(2), which required that the indictment include notice that the defendant has an interest in forfeitable property. Criminal Rule 32 now provides that the presentence report state whether the government is seeking forfeiture of property. Criminal Rule 32.2 received six amendments concerning criminal forfeiture. Criminal Rule 41 created a two-step process for seizing and reviewing electronic storage media. Further, of the Rules Governing § 2254 Proceedings, Rule 11 was created to make the requirements …

Federal Rules Update: How Rules Are Made: A Brief Review, David A. Schlueter

Faculty Articles

In June 2007, the Standing Committee on the Federal Rules of Procedure and Evidence authorized publication for comment on a number amendments to the rules of criminal procedure. The amendment to Criminal Rule 7 would delete subdivision (c)(2) because it is covered in Rule 32.2(a). The change to Criminal Rule 32 would provide that the presentence report should state whether the government is seeking forfeiture of property. Amendments to Criminal Rule 32.2. would change a number of procedures related to criminal forfeiture. Criminal Rule 41 would create a two-step process for seizing and reviewing electronic storage media. Amendments to the …

A Short History Of Hearsay Reform, With Particular Reference To Hoffman V. Palmer, Eddie Morgan And Jerry Frank, Michael S. Ariens

Faculty Articles

Much of the history of the American law of evidence, including its most contentious issue, hearsay, is the story of stasis and reform. The case of Hoffman v. Palmer represents one of few cases concerning hearsay known by name, and illustrates that “false” evidence has often been used to caution against efforts proclaiming “radical reform” of the law of evidence.

In this case involving a collision between a car and a train, the critical question was: Is the defendant railroad permitted to introduce into evidence the transcript of a question and answer session made two days after the accident between …