Law Commons^™

Statutory Genres: Substance, Procedure, Jurisdiction, Karen Petroski

All Faculty Scholarship

To decide many cases, courts need to characterize some of the legal rules involved, placing each one in a specific doctrinal category to identify the rule’s effect on the litigation. The consequences of characterization decisions can be profound, but the grounds for making and justifying them are often left unstated. This Article offers the first systematic comparison of two important types of legal characterization: the distinction between substantive and procedural rules or statutes, a distinction federal courts make in several contexts; and the distinction between jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional rules, especially those relating to litigation filing requirements. The Article explains the …

The Supreme Court’S Regulation Of Civil Procedure: Lessons From Administrative Law, Lumen N. Mulligan, Glen Staszewski

Faculty Works

In this Article, we argue that the Supreme Court should route most Federal Rules of Civil Procedure issues through the notice-and-comment rulemaking process of the Civil Rules Advisory Committee instead of issuing judgments in adjudications, unless the case can be resolved solely through the deployment of traditional tools of statutory construction. While we are not the first to express a preference for rulemaking on civil procedure issues, we advance the position in four significant ways. First, we argue that the Supreme Court in the civil procedure arena is vested with powers analogous to most administrative agencies. Second, building upon this …

Adversarial No More: How Sua Sponte Assertion Of Affirmative Defenses To Habeas Wreaks Havoc On The Rules Of Civil Procedure, Katherine Macfarlane

Journal Articles

In every federal civil case, a defendant must raise its affirmative defenses in the pleading that responds to a plaintiff's complaint. According to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(c), failure to properly plead, for example, a statute of limitations defense, waives the defense for good. Rule 8(c) does not exempt any category of affirmative defense, nor does it forgive unintentional omissions of certain defenses. It also does not prefer governmental defendants to others. Yet in habeas corpus cases, the most significant affirmative defenses to habeas petitions need not comply with Rule 8(c). Instead, federal courts may raise the affirmative defenses …

Erie As A Choice Of Enforcement Defaults, Sergio J. Campos

Articles

The Erie doctrine governs, among other things, when a federal court sitting in diversity jurisdiction may use a federal procedure that differs from the procedure a state court would use. Displacing the state procedure with the federal procedure (or not) may impact the substantive objectives of either state or federal law, but the current Erie doctrine provides little guidance. This Article argues that the Erie doctrine is best understood as governing a choice of enforcement defaults. As argued below, the primary function of civil liability is to protect a substantive entitlement to avoid the legal violation, either directly through specific …

Navigating The Borders Between International Commercial Arbitration And U.S. Federal Courts: A Jurisprudential Gps, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

This article provides just that sort of guide, outlining the various ways in which U.S. federal courts can become involved in international commercial arbitration and introducing both basic and advanced concepts in a straightforward, practical manner. However, this article provides more than just an overview. Instead, it discusses relevant issues on a motion-by-motion basis, helping readers find immediate answers to their questions while also getting a picture of the field as a whole. Written especially for busy lawyers, this article gives practitioners, arbitrators and new and infrequent participants in international commercial arbitration a concise but comprehensive understanding of the unique …

Regulatory Litigation In The European Union: Does The U.S. Class Action Have A New Analogue?, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

This article is the first to consider the European resolution from a regulatory perspective, using a combination of new governance theory and equivalence functionalism to determine whether the European Union has adopted or is in the process of adopting a form of regulatory litigation. In so doing, the article considers a number of issues, including the basic definition of regulatory litigation, how class and collective relief can act as a regulatory mechanism and the special problems that arise when regulatory litigation is used in the transnational context. The article also includes a normative element, providing a number of suggestions on …

Erie And The Rules Of Evidence, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Jay Tidmarsh offers an intriguing new test for drawing the allimportant line between procedure and substance for purposes of Erie. The Tidmarsh test is attractively simple, yet seemingly reaches the right result in separating out truly “procedural” rules from more substantive ones. Since I am not a proceduralist, in this Response I will leave the Tidmarsh test’s explanatory power and practical workability vis-à-vis general civil procedure rules to others more qualified than I. Instead, I want to focus on the implications of the Tidmarsh test for the Federal Rules of Evidence. Like others in the evidence world, I have long …

Mass Torts And Due Process, Sergio J. Campos

Articles

No abstract provided.

Pleading As Information-Forcing, Alexander Reinert

Articles

Academics, judges, and practitioners have devoted much attention to the potential impact of the federal pleading standards announced in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), and Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007). Many have criticized Iqbal and Twombly on procedural, substantive, and policy grounds. And although most everyone agrees that the cases mark a break with past liberal pleading rules and have changed pleading practice, there is little agreement about precisely how the cases have affected ultimate outcomes. Indeed, there is much confusion about what exactly the new rules require of a pleader.

In this Article, …

Plausibility Pleading And Employment Discrimination, Suzette M. Malveaux

Publications

No abstract provided.

Book Review: 'E-Discovery In Canada' By Todd J. Burke, Kelly Friedman, Andrew J. Mccreary, James Morton, Susan Nickle, Vincenzo Rondinelli, Glenn Smith, James Swanson & Susan Wortzman, Robert Currie

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

It is not hyperbolic to say that the proliferation of electronically stored information (ESI) is probably the most prominent change-harbinger and potential havoc-wreaker in civil litigation today — second only, perhaps, to the spiralling costs of litigation itself. Indeed, the practical and legal difficulties associated with the storage, gathering, preservation, disclosure and evidentiary use of ESI have the potential to act as a Trojan Horse, causing what would previously have been ordinary cases to implode under their weight. Increasing recognition of this is evident; electronic discovery (e-discovery) cases have begun to emerge in the reports, a successful co-operative effort by …

Party Autonomy And Access To Justice In The Uncitral Online Dispute Resolution Project, Ronald A. Brand

Articles

The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) has directed its Working Group III to prepare instruments that would provide the framework for a global system of online dispute resolution (ODR). Negotiations began in December 2010 and have produced an as-yet-incomplete set of procedural rules for ODR. It is anticipated that three other documents will be prepared, addressing substantive principles to be applied in ODR, guidelines and minimum requirements for ODR providers and neutrals, and a cross-border mechanism for enforcement of the resulting ODR decisions on a global basis.

The most difficult issues in the ODR negotiations are centered …

Evaluating And Improving The Mdl Process, Francis Mcgovern, John G. Heyburn

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Triaging Appointed-Counsel Funding And Pro Se Access To Justice, Benjamin H. Barton, Stephanos Bibas

All Faculty Scholarship

For decades, scholars and advocates have lauded Gideon’s guarantee of appointed counsel in criminal cases and sought to extend it into a civil-Gideon right in a range of civil cases. This past Term, the Supreme Court disappointed the civil-Gideon movement in Turner v. Rogers, unanimously rejecting an across-the-board right to counsel while encouraging reforms to make courts more accessible to pro se litigants. Turner is mostly right, we argue, because funding limitations require reserving counsel mostly for criminal cases, where they are needed most. For the first time, the Court recognized that lawyers can make cases not only slower and …

Border Skirmishes: The Intersection Between Litigation And International Commercial Arbitration, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

This essay considers the tension between the autonomous theory of international commercial arbitration and the more interactive theory advanced by Gary Born during his keynote address at the recent “Border Skirmishes” symposium at the University of Missouri School of Law. In his presentation, Born considered the relationship between litigation and international commercial arbitration and distinguished between permissible “border crossings” and impermissible “border incursions.” This essay considers how these concepts play out both in routine interactions between courts and tribunals and more in difficult scenarios, such as those involving anti-suit injunctions. The discussion also presents statistics concerning the amount of ancillary …

The Structural Role Of Private Enforcement Mechanisms In Public Law, J. Maria Glover

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The American regulatory system is unique in that it expressly relies upon a diffuse set of regulators, including private parties, rather than upon a centralized bureaucracy, for the effectuation of its substantive aims. In contrast with more traditional conceptions of private enforcement as an ad hoc supplement to public law, this Article argues that private regulation through litigation is an integral part of the structure of the modern regulatory state. Private litigation and the mechanisms that enable it are not merely add-ons to our regulatory regime, much less are they fundamentally at odds with it.

Yet mechanisms of enforcement attendant …

The Federal Rules Of Civil Settlement, J. Maria Glover

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were originally based upon a straightforward model of adjudication: Resolve the merits of cases at trial and use pretrial procedures to facilitate accurate trial outcomes. Though appealing in principle, this model has little relevance today. As is now well known, the endpoint around which the Federal Rules were structured — trial — virtually never occurs. Today, the vast majority of civil cases terminate in settlement. This Article is the first to argue that the current litigation process needs a new regime of civil procedure for the world of settlement

This Article begins by providing …

Triaging Appointed-Counsel Funding And Pro Se Access To Justice, Benjamin H. Barton

Scholarly Works

For decades, scholars and advocates have lauded Gideon’s guarantee of appointed counsel in criminal cases and sought to extend it into a civil-Gideon right in a range of civil cases. This past Term, the Supreme Court disappointed the civil-Gideon movement in Turner v. Rogers, unanimously rejecting an across-the-board right to counsel while encouraging reforms to make courts more accessible to pro se litigants. Turner is mostly right, we argue, because funding limitations require reserving counsel mostly for criminal cases, where they are needed most. For the first time, the Court recognized that lawyers can make cases not only slower and …