Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Civil Procedure (42)
- Courts (33)
- Litigation (22)
- Jurisdiction (15)
- Civil Law (13)
-
- Law and Society (13)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (12)
- Legal History (11)
- State and Local Government Law (11)
- Jurisprudence (10)
- Rule of Law (10)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (9)
- Criminal Law (8)
- Criminal Procedure (8)
- Constitutional Law (7)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (7)
- Legal Profession (7)
- Legislation (7)
- Social Welfare Law (6)
- Torts (5)
- Human Rights Law (4)
- Dispute Resolution and Arbitration (3)
- Labor and Employment Law (3)
- Legal Remedies (3)
- Legal Writing and Research (3)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (3)
- Evidence (2)
- Fourteenth Amendment (2)
- Institution
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (9)
- Columbia Law School (5)
- Duke Law (5)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (4)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (4)
-
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (3)
- University of Baltimore Law (2)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (2)
- Chapman University (1)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (1)
- New York Law School (1)
- Pace University (1)
- SJ Quinney College of Law, University of Utah (1)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (1)
- Selected Works (1)
- SelectedWorks (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (1)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (1)
- University of Colorado Law School (1)
- University of Maine School of Law (1)
- University of Michigan Law School (1)
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Touro Law Review (9)
- Faculty Scholarship (7)
- All Faculty Scholarship (6)
- Scholarly Works (3)
- Duke Law Master of Judicial Studies Theses (2)
-
- Testimony (2)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (1)
- Bolch Judicial Institute Publications (1)
- Caprice L. Roberts (1)
- Donald J. Kochan (1)
- Faculty Publications (1)
- Faculty Working Papers (1)
- Faculty Works (1)
- Federal Courts and Federal Practice (1)
- Law Faculty Articles and Research (1)
- Nevada Law Journal (1)
- Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy (1)
- Northwestern University Law Review (1)
- Pace International Law Review (1)
- PhD Dissertations (1)
- Publications (1)
- Reviews (1)
- The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process (1)
- University of Cincinnati Law Review (1)
- Utah Law Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 48 of 48
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Material Facts In The Debate Over Twombly And Iqbal, Jonah B. Gelbach
Material Facts In The Debate Over Twombly And Iqbal, Jonah B. Gelbach
All Faculty Scholarship
This paper presents empirical evidence concerning the adjudication of defendant-filed summary judgment motions from nearly 2,000 randomly selected employment discrimination and contracts cases to try to assess Twombly and Iqbal’s performance in filtering cases according to merit. I first explain how such data might be helpful in such an assessment, taking into account the possibility that parties’ behavior might have changed following Twombly and Iqbal.
I then report results indicating that even using this large collection of data -- the most comprehensive data assembled to date to address this question -- we cannot tell whether “TwIqbal” …
Judicial Priorities, Bert I. Huang, Tejas N. Narechania
Judicial Priorities, Bert I. Huang, Tejas N. Narechania
Faculty Scholarship
In an unprecedented move, the Illinois Supreme Court in the mid-1990s imposed hard caps on the state's appeals courts, drastically reducing the number of opinions they could publish, while also narrowing the formal criteria for opinions to qualify for publication. The high court explained that the amendment's purpose was to reduce the "avalanche of opinions emanating from [the] Appellate Court," which was causing legal research to become "unnecessarily burdensome, difficult and costly." This unusual and sudden policy shift offers the chance to observe the priorities of a common law court in its production of published opinions. The method we introduce …
Can We Learn Anything About Pleading Changes From Existing Data?, Jonah B. Gelbach
Can We Learn Anything About Pleading Changes From Existing Data?, Jonah B. Gelbach
All Faculty Scholarship
In light of the gateway role that the pleading standard can play in our civil litigation system, measuring the empirical effects of pleading policy changes embodied in the Supreme Court's controversial Twombly and Iqbal cases is important. In my earlier paper, Locking the Doors to Discovery, I argued that in doing so, special care is required in formulating the object of empirical study. Taking party behavior seriously, as Locking the Doors does, leads to empirical results suggesting that Twombly and Iqbal have had substantial effects among cases that face Rule 12(b)(6) motions post-Iqbal. This paper responds to …
Remedies Unified In Nine Verses, Caprice Roberts
Remedies Unified In Nine Verses, Caprice Roberts
Caprice L. Roberts
An original substantive poem with footnotes that makes three bold claims: (i) Remedies shapes substantive rights, (ii) the scholarly quest for a unified theory of Remedies is ill-fated, and (iii) Remedies properly reasoned will unify across borders, doctrinal and geographic.
Critical Race Empiricism: A New Means To Measure Civil Procedure, Victor D. Quintanilla
Critical Race Empiricism: A New Means To Measure Civil Procedure, Victor D. Quintanilla
Articles by Maurer Faculty
This article reflects the second phase in a research line examining the effects of highly subjective pleading rules, specifically, Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), and was an invited contribution to a symposium, which explored the intersection of empirical legal methods and critical race theory. In this phase, I updated the empirical legal analysis in a prior article, Beyond Common Sense: A Social Psychological Study of Iqbal’s Effect on Claims of Race Discrimination, 17 Michigan Journal of Race and Law 1 (2011), in three ways. First, I lengthened the time horizon from 18 months to 24 months, increasing the …
Managerial Judging And Substantive Law, Tobias Barrington Wolff
Managerial Judging And Substantive Law, Tobias Barrington Wolff
All Faculty Scholarship
The figure of the proactive jurist, involved in case management from the outset of the litigation and attentive throughout the proceedings to the impact of her decisions on settlement dynamics -- a managerial judge -- has displaced the passive umpire as the dominant paradigm in the federal district courts. Thus far, discussions of managerial judging have focused primarily upon values endogenous to the practice of judging. Procedural scholarship has paid little attention to the impact of the underlying substantive law on the parameters and conduct of complex proceedings.
In this Article, I examine the interface between substantive law and managerial …
The Supreme Court’S Regulation Of Civil Procedure: Lessons From Administrative Law, Lumen N. Mulligan, Glen Staszewski
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 …
Lassiter V. Department Of Social Services: Why Is It Such A Lousy Case?, Brooke D. Coleman
Lassiter V. Department Of Social Services: Why Is It Such A Lousy Case?, Brooke D. Coleman
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Evaluating And Improving The Mdl Process, Francis Mcgovern, John G. Heyburn
Evaluating And Improving The Mdl Process, Francis Mcgovern, John G. Heyburn
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
While Effusive, "Conclusory" Is Still Quite Elusive: The Story Of A Word, Iqbal, And A Perplexing Lexical Inquiry Of Supreme Importance, Donald J. Kochan
While Effusive, "Conclusory" Is Still Quite Elusive: The Story Of A Word, Iqbal, And A Perplexing Lexical Inquiry Of Supreme Importance, Donald J. Kochan
Donald J. Kochan
The meaning of the word “conclusory” seems really, quite elusory. Conclusory is a widespread, common, and effusive word in the modern legal lexicon. Yet you would not necessarily know that by looking through many dictionaries. “Conclusory” has been a late comer to the pages of most dictionaries. Even today, not all dictionaries include the word “conclusory”, those that do have only recently adopted it, and the small number of available dictionary definitions seem to struggle to capture the word’s usage in the legal world. Yet the word “conclusory” has taken center stage in the procedural plays of civil litigation with …
Hearings, Mark Spottswood
Hearings, Mark Spottswood
Faculty Working Papers
This article explores a constantly recurring procedural question: When is fact-finding improved by a live hearing, and when would it be better to rely on a written record? Unfortunately, when judges, lawyers, and rulemakers consider this issue, they are led astray by the widely shared—but false—assumption that a judge can best determine issues of credibility by viewing the demeanor of witnesses while they are testifying. In fact, a large body of scientific evidence indicates that judges are more likely to be deceived by lying or mistaken witnesses when observing their testimony in person than if the judges were to review …
Imagining Judges That Apply Law: How They Might Do It, James Maxeiner
Imagining Judges That Apply Law: How They Might Do It, James Maxeiner
All Faculty Scholarship
"Judges should apply the law, not make it." That plea appears perennially in American politics. American legal scholars belittle it as a simple-minded demand that is silly and misleading. A glance beyond our shores dispels the notion that the American public is naive to expect judges to apply rather than to make law.
American obsession with judicial lawmaking has its price: indifference to judicial law applying. If truth be told, practically we have no method for judges, as a matter of routine, to apply law to facts. Our failure leads American legal scholars to question whether applying law to facts …
Docketology, District Courts And Doctrine, David A. Hoffman, Alan J. Izenman, Jeffrey Lidicker
Docketology, District Courts And Doctrine, David A. Hoffman, Alan J. Izenman, Jeffrey Lidicker
All Faculty Scholarship
Empirical legal scholars have traditionally modeled trial court judicial opinion writing by assuming that judges act rationally, seeking to maximize their influence by writing opinions in politically important cases. Support for this hypothesis has reviewed published trial court opinions, finding that civil rights and other "hot" topics are more likely to be explained than purportedly ordinary legal problems involved in resolving social security and commercial law cases. This orthodoxy comforts consumers of legal opinions, because it suggests that they are largely representative of judicial work. To test such views, we collected data from a thousand cases in four different jurisdictions. …
Judicial Comments On Pending Cases: The Ethical Restrictions And The Sanctions – A Case Study Of The Microsoft Litigation, Ronald D. Rotunda
Judicial Comments On Pending Cases: The Ethical Restrictions And The Sanctions – A Case Study Of The Microsoft Litigation, Ronald D. Rotunda
Law Faculty Articles and Research
No abstract provided.
Contracting Access To The Courts: Myth Or Reality? Bane Or Boon?, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Contracting Access To The Courts: Myth Or Reality? Bane Or Boon?, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
Many scholars of the dispute resolution system perceive a sea change in attitudes toward adjudication that took place in the mid-1970s. Among the events of the time included the Pound Conference, which put the Chief Justice of the United States and the national judicial establishment on record in favor of at least some refinement, if not restriction, on access to courts. In addition, Chief Justice Burger, the driving force behind the Pound Conference, also used his bully pulpit as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to promote ADR, particularly court-annexed arbitration. The availability of judicial adjuncts such as court-annexed arbitration …
Halting Devolution Or Bleak To The Future? Subrin's New-Old Procedure As A Possible Antidote To Dreyfuss's "Tolstoy Problem", Jeffrey W. Stempel
Halting Devolution Or Bleak To The Future? Subrin's New-Old Procedure As A Possible Antidote To Dreyfuss's "Tolstoy Problem", Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
Professors Rochelle Dreyfuss and Stephen Subrin first presented their ideas on the 1993 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Civil Rules) at the 1994 Annual Meeting of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) in a program titled, “The 1993 Discovery Amendments: Evolution, Revolution, or Devolution?” After the program, I was left with the depressing view that the answer was devolution, which is defined as a “retrograde evolution,” or “degeneration.” Dreyfuss provides a detailed but succinct review of the changes in discovery occasioned by the new rules as well as a vantage point for assessing the social and …
Sanctions, Symmetry, And Safe Harbors: Limiting Misapplication Of Rule 11 By Harmonizing It With Pre-Verdict Dismissal Devices, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Sanctions, Symmetry, And Safe Harbors: Limiting Misapplication Of Rule 11 By Harmonizing It With Pre-Verdict Dismissal Devices, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
With only a small risk of overstatement, one could say that sanctions in civil litigation exploded during the 1980s, with the 1983 amendment to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 acting as the principal catalyst. From 1938 until the 1983 amendment, only two dozen or so cases on Rule 11 were reported, with courts rarely imposing sanctions. Although a few cases were notable by virtue of sanction size, prestige of the firm sanctioned, or publicity attending the underlying case, the legal profession largely regarded Rule 11 as a dead letter. In addition, other sanctions provisions, such as Federal Rule of …
The New Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure And Their Effect On Federal Court Practice In The Northern District, Roger J. Miner '56
The New Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure And Their Effect On Federal Court Practice In The Northern District, Roger J. Miner '56
Federal Courts and Federal Practice
No abstract provided.