Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (7)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (7)
- University of Washington School of Law (4)
- Brigham Young University Law School (3)
- Seattle University School of Law (3)
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (3)
- University of Michigan Law School (3)
- University of Richmond (3)
- West Virginia University (3)
- Florida State University College of Law (2)
- Fordham Law School (2)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (2)
- UIC School of Law (2)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (2)
- University of Kentucky (2)
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (2)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (2)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (1)
- Columbia Law School (1)
- Cornell University Law School (1)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (1)
- Selected Works (1)
- St. Mary's University (1)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (1)
- University of Denver (1)
- University of Georgia School of Law (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- Keyword
-
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (4)
- Civil procedure (3)
- Civil Procedure (2)
- Class actions (2)
- Courts (2)
-
- Judgments (2)
- Jurisdiction (2)
- Practice and Procedure (2)
- Settlements (2)
- Adams v. Wright (1)
- Allen v. The United States of America: The Substantial Connection between Nuclear Fallout and Cancer (1)
- Allen v. U.S. (1)
- Ancillary jurisdiction (1)
- Antitrust (1)
- Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act (1)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation; Civil Procedure (1)
- Appeal (1)
- Appellate Procedure (1)
- Appellate jurisdiction (1)
- Article 10 (1)
- Article III (1)
- Baby Jane Doe (1)
- Bastardy laws (1)
- Ben Bursten (1)
- Beyond Psychiatric Expertise (1)
- Burden of proof (1)
- Bursten (1)
- CPLR (1)
- CRCP (1)
- Case method (1)
- Publication
-
- Villanova Law Review (7)
- Supreme Court Case Files (5)
- Washington Law Review (4)
- All Faculty Scholarship (3)
- BYU Law Review (3)
-
- Seattle University Law Review (3)
- Touro Law Review (3)
- West Virginia Law Review (3)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (2)
- Faculty Scholarship (2)
- Faculty Works (2)
- Florida State University Law Review (2)
- Kentucky Law Journal (2)
- Michigan Law Review (2)
- Scholarly Works (2)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (2)
- University of Richmond Law Review (2)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (2)
- Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press (1)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Fordham Urban Law Journal (1)
- In the Public Interest (1)
- Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Michael J Goldberg (1)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (1)
- Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship (1)
- UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship (1)
- UIC Law Review (1)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 62
Full-Text Articles in Law
Abuse In Plaintiff Class Action Settlements: The Need For A Guardian During Pretrial Settlement Negotiations, Sylvia R. Lazos
Abuse In Plaintiff Class Action Settlements: The Need For A Guardian During Pretrial Settlement Negotiations, Sylvia R. Lazos
Michigan Law Review
This Note explores the problem of abuse of the class action device during the pretrial settlement process. Part I analyzes the underlying sources of potential abuse in pretrial settlement negotiations. Part II assesses the adequacy of the standards currently used by courts to detect collusive class action settlements. Part III concludes that the appointment of a neutral third-party guardian to oversee the pretrial negotiation process furthers the judicial policy of encouraging settlements while protecting the interests of the absentee class.
Modern Evidence And The Expert Witness, Faust Rossi
Modern Evidence And The Expert Witness, Faust Rossi
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Matshushita Electrical Industrial Co., Ltd V. Zenith Radio Corporation, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Matshushita Electrical Industrial Co., Ltd V. Zenith Radio Corporation, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Thornburgh V. American College Of Obstetricians And Gynecologists, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Thornburgh V. American College Of Obstetricians And Gynecologists, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Local 28 Of The Sheetmetal Workers' International Association V. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Eeoc), Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Local 28 Of The Sheetmetal Workers' International Association V. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Eeoc), Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Schiavone V. Fortune, Lewis F. Powell Jr
Schiavone V. Fortune, Lewis F. Powell Jr
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Diamond V. Charles, Lewis F. Powell Jr
The Applicability Of The Antitrust Procedures And Penalties Act Of 1974 To Voluntary Dismissals, Jon B. Jacobs
The Applicability Of The Antitrust Procedures And Penalties Act Of 1974 To Voluntary Dismissals, Jon B. Jacobs
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Note argues that Congress should amend the APPA to require a judicial public interest determination prior to the entry of a voluntary dismissal in government-initiated civil antitrust actions. Part I of this Note briefly describes the APPA and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). Part II asserts that APPA procedures do not currently apply to voluntary dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1). Part III concludes that the purposes underlying the APPA and general policy considerations support the legislative extension of the Act to dismissals. Part IV responds to objections to this proposal. Finally, Part V presents a specific amendment to the …
Civil Procedure—Jurisdiction—County Court Has Jurisdiction In Bastardy Cases, Laura Garton Wiltshire
Civil Procedure—Jurisdiction—County Court Has Jurisdiction In Bastardy Cases, Laura Garton Wiltshire
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Claim And Issue Preclusion In Civil Litigation In Washington, Philip A. Trautman
Claim And Issue Preclusion In Civil Litigation In Washington, Philip A. Trautman
Washington Law Review
The preclusive effect of a judgment is an age-old topic. Why then add more to the existing commentary? Principally, it is because within recent years there have been noteworthy cases and significant developments in the governing principles. The purposes of this article are to recall the orthodoxy of the subject, to note the changes that have been occurring, and to suggest what may be forthcoming.
Opinion Work Product, Expert Witness Discovery, And The Interaction Of Rules 26{B)(3) And 26(B)(4)(A): Bogosian V, Gulf Oil Corporation, Carlisle G. Packard
Opinion Work Product, Expert Witness Discovery, And The Interaction Of Rules 26{B)(3) And 26(B)(4)(A): Bogosian V, Gulf Oil Corporation, Carlisle G. Packard
BYU Law Review
No abstract provided.
Claim And Issue Preclusion In Civil Litigation In Washington, Philip A. Trautman
Claim And Issue Preclusion In Civil Litigation In Washington, Philip A. Trautman
Washington Law Review
The preclusive effect of a judgment is an age-old topic. Why then add more to the existing commentary? Principally, it is because within recent years there have been noteworthy cases and significant developments in the governing principles. The purposes of this article are to recall the orthodoxy of the subject, to note the changes that have been occurring, and to suggest what may be forthcoming.
Appellate Procedure—Orders Disqualifying Counsel Are Not Immediately Appealable Under The Collateral Order Exception To 28 U.S.C. Section 1291, Troy Anthony Price
Appellate Procedure—Orders Disqualifying Counsel Are Not Immediately Appealable Under The Collateral Order Exception To 28 U.S.C. Section 1291, Troy Anthony Price
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
State Law In Federal Courts: The Implications Of De Novo Review—In Re Mclinn, 739 F.2d 1395 (9th Cir. 1984), Wendy E. Russell
State Law In Federal Courts: The Implications Of De Novo Review—In Re Mclinn, 739 F.2d 1395 (9th Cir. 1984), Wendy E. Russell
Washington Law Review
In In re McLinn, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected this traditional reliance on the district court's determination of state law and held that issues of state law in federal court will be reviewed under a new, de novo standard. The McLinn case reveals a dilemma in the treatment of state law in federal courts. The Erie doctrine requires federal courts to ascertain and apply state law, and gives them a broad responsibility for doing so. At the same time federal courts are unable to accurately predict and apply unresolved issues of state law. This Note discusses the doctrine …
Multiple Claims Under Rule 54(B): A Time For Reexamination?, Craig E. Stewart
Multiple Claims Under Rule 54(B): A Time For Reexamination?, Craig E. Stewart
BYU Law Review
No abstract provided.
Relief From Final Judgment Under Rule 60(B)(1) Due To Judicial Errors Of Law, Michigan Law Review
Relief From Final Judgment Under Rule 60(B)(1) Due To Judicial Errors Of Law, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
This Note seeks to resolve these conflicts by proposing a sensible reading of rule 60(b )(1) that reconciles the basic philosophies underlying differing interpretations of the rule. Part I examines the history of rule 60(b)(l) and the policies espoused by the courts and commentators in considering whether the rule should be applied to judicial errors of law and concludes that courts should employ the rule to correct obvious judicial errors of law. Part II recommends a broad scope for rule 60(b )(1) motions, proposing that the only type of alleged judicial error outside the reach of such a motion should …
The New York State Statute Of Limitations For Toxic Tort Claims: Time For A Discovery Rule, Deborah L. Christoff
The New York State Statute Of Limitations For Toxic Tort Claims: Time For A Discovery Rule, Deborah L. Christoff
In the Public Interest
No abstract provided.
Can Civil Rule 52(A) Peacefully Co-Exist With Independent Review In Actual Malice Cases? Bose Corp. V. Consumers Union, 104 S. Ct. 1949 (1984), Cathy Parker
Washington Law Review
This Note examines Bose to determine whether the Court intended to totally reject Rule 52(a) as completely inapplicable in determinations of actual malice. It concludes that independent review should not replace Rule 52(a) in actual malice cases but rather should serve a separate function to ensure that the reasoning of district courts complies with constitutional legal principles. The Note further suggests that Bose created a new rule of law protecting the media from suit where defendants have simply used "imprecise language" in reporting. In addition, because of the ambiguitites in the Court's opinion, the case can support not only the …
Public Trial, Pseudonymous Parties: When Should Litigants Be Permitted To Keep Their Identities Confidential?, Joan E. Steinman
Public Trial, Pseudonymous Parties: When Should Litigants Be Permitted To Keep Their Identities Confidential?, Joan E. Steinman
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Muddying The Unclear Waters Of Standing: Allen V. Wright, Larry S. Jenkins
Muddying The Unclear Waters Of Standing: Allen V. Wright, Larry S. Jenkins
BYU Law Review
No abstract provided.
The August 1, 1983 Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure: A Critical Evaluation And A Proposal For More Effective Discovery Through Local Rules, Edward D. Cavanagh
The August 1, 1983 Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure: A Critical Evaluation And A Proposal For More Effective Discovery Through Local Rules, Edward D. Cavanagh
Villanova Law Review
No abstract provided.
Procedural Issues In Raising A Constitutional Taking Claim: Trends In Florida Law, Robert P. Banks
Procedural Issues In Raising A Constitutional Taking Claim: Trends In Florida Law, Robert P. Banks
Florida State University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Rule 1.540(B), Florida Rules Of Civil Procedure: In Search Of An Equitable Standard Of Relief From Fraud, C. Timothy Gray
Rule 1.540(B), Florida Rules Of Civil Procedure: In Search Of An Equitable Standard Of Relief From Fraud, C. Timothy Gray
Florida State University Law Review
No abstract provided.
1985 Civil Rule Amendments, Robert M. Hardaway
1985 Civil Rule Amendments, Robert M. Hardaway
Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship
Effective January 1, 1985, significant amendments were made to several of the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure ("C.R.C.P."). The most important amendments were to C.R.C.P. Rules 59 (posttrial) motions) and 103 (garnishment).' However, there were also significant amendments to C.R.C.P. Rules 58 (entry of judgment), 52 (findings by the court), 50 (motion for directed verdict), and 6 (time), as well as Colorado Appellate Rules ("C.A.R.") Rule 4 (appeals).
Weber V. Stony Brook Hospital: Inconsistent Procedure, Contradictory Results
Weber V. Stony Brook Hospital: Inconsistent Procedure, Contradictory Results
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Multistate Consumer Class Action: Local Solutions, National Problems, 87 W. Va. L. Rev. 271 (1985), Allen R. Kamp
The Multistate Consumer Class Action: Local Solutions, National Problems, 87 W. Va. L. Rev. 271 (1985), Allen R. Kamp
UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Myth Of Uniformity In Federal Civil Procedure: Federal Civil Rule 83 And District Court Local Rulemaking Powers, David M. Roberts
The Myth Of Uniformity In Federal Civil Procedure: Federal Civil Rule 83 And District Court Local Rulemaking Powers, David M. Roberts
Seattle University Law Review
This Article begins by demonstrating that the proliferation of local rules indeed poses a threat to the integrity and uniformity of federal procedure. The Article next examines the general policies relating to local rulemaking. Based on that analysis, the final section presents specific proposals for rethinking rule 83 to permit informed local control over truly local matters, while placing beyond the reach of district courts those matters that are national in scope.
Tightening The Reigns On Pendent And Ancillary Jurisdiction, David Lawyer
Tightening The Reigns On Pendent And Ancillary Jurisdiction, David Lawyer
Seattle University Law Review
Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. Article III, section 2 of the United States Constitution makes this principle clear by the statement that "judicial Power shall extend to all Cases . . arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties . . . and . . . to all controversies . . . between Citizens of different States . . ."' One might argue that "judicial power" under Article III is not the same thing as jurisdiction. But the exercise of jurisdiction in situations in which a federal court does not have judicial power would …
Offers Of Judgment And Rule 68: A Response To The Chief Justice, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 341 (1985), Lynn Sanders Branham
Offers Of Judgment And Rule 68: A Response To The Chief Justice, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 341 (1985), Lynn Sanders Branham
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.