Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Civil Procedure
Civil Practice, Jay C. Carlisle
Civil Practice, Jay C. Carlisle
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
During the Survey year, legislation was enacted relating to twenty-seven of the sixty-five articles of the CPLR. Additionally, there have been significant developments in the decisional law of res judicata. These and other areas should be of interest to the practitioner.
Nonparty Document Discovery From Corporations And Governmental Entities Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Jay C. Carlisle
Nonparty Document Discovery From Corporations And Governmental Entities Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Jay C. Carlisle
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This Article will analyze the various approaches courts follow when deciding if a nonparty can be compelled to produce documents located outside the judicial district where a rule 45 subpoena duces tecum is issued. Part I will review the procedure for nonparty document discovery and discuss the decisional law applying the enforcement provisions of rule 45. Part II will analyze the jurisdictional principles used by federal district courts to determine when documents under the control of nonparties, and not located within the territorial limits of the court, should be produced for discovery purposes. Part III will recommend the appropriate approach …
There's No Reason For It; It's Just Our Policy: The Well-Pleaded Complaint Rule Sabotages The Purposes Of Federal Question Jurisdiction, Donald L. Doernberg
There's No Reason For It; It's Just Our Policy: The Well-Pleaded Complaint Rule Sabotages The Purposes Of Federal Question Jurisdiction, Donald L. Doernberg
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This Article is presented in three parts. Section I traces the statutory and case development of federal question jurisdiction, both under the constitutional and statutory “arising under”' language. Section II demonstrates the problems that the Mottley rule has caused in building a rational system of federal question jurisdiction, particularly in cases seeking declaratory judgments. Section III contends that the Mottley rule is irrational because it is a mechanical rule that ignores important policy considerations underlying the existence of federal question jurisdiction. Section III goes on to suggest that federal question jurisdiction should depend upon the centrality of the federal issue …