Jurisprudence Commons^™

Certainty Versus Flexibility In The Conflict Of Laws, Kermit Roosevelt Iii

All Faculty Scholarship

Traditional choice of law theory conceives of certainty and flexibility as opposed values: increase one, and you inevitably decrease the other. This article challenges the received wisdom by reconceptualizing the distinction. Rather than caring about certainty or flexibility for their own sake, it suggests, we care about them because each makes it easier to promote a certain cluster of values. And while there may be a necessary tradeoff between certainty and flexibility, there is no necessary tradeoff between the clusters of values. It is possible to improve a choice of law system with regard to both of them. The article …

The Triangle Of Law And The Role Of Evidence In Class Action Litigation, Jonah B. Gelbach

All Faculty Scholarship

In Tyson Foods v. Bouaphakeo, a "donning and doffing" case brought under Iowa state law incorporating the Fair Labor Standards Act's overtime pay provisions, the petitioners asked the Supreme Court to reject the use of statistical evidence in Rule 23(b)(3) class certification. To its great credit, the Court refused. In its majority opinion, the Court cited both the Federal Rules of Evidence and federal common law interpreting the FLSA. In this paper, I take a moderately deep dive into the facts of the case, and the three opinions penned by Justice Kennedy (for the Court), Chief Justice Roberts (in …

“Spooky Action At A Distance”: Intangible Injury In Fact In The Information Age, Seth F. Kreimer

All Faculty Scholarship

Two decades after Justice Douglas coined “injury in fact” as the token of admission to federal court under Article III, Justice Scalia sealed it into the constitutional canon in Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife. In the two decades since Lujan, Justice Scalia has thrown increasingly pointed barbs at the permissive standing doctrine of the Warren Court, maintaining it is founded on impermissible recognition of “Psychic Injury.” Justice Scalia and his acolytes take the position that Article III requires a tough minded, common sense and practical approach. Injuries in fact must be "tangible" "direct" "concrete" "de facto" realities in time and …

Scott V. Harris And The Future Of Summary Judgment, Tobias Barrington Wolff

All Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court’s decision in Scott v. Harris has quickly become a staple in many Civil Procedure courses, and small wonder. The cinematic high-speed car chase complete with dash-cam video and the Court’s controversial treatment of that video evidence seem tailor-made for classroom discussion. As is often true with instant classics, however, splashy first impressions can mask a more complex state of affairs. At the heart of Scott v. Harris lies the potential for a radical doctrinal reformation: a shift in the core summary judgment standard undertaken to justify a massive expansion of interlocutory appellate jurisdiction in qualified immunity cases. …

Proportionality And The Social Benefits Of Discovery: Out Of Sight And Out Of Mind?, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

In this short essay, based on remarks delivered at the 2015 meeting of the AALS Section of Litigation, I use a recent paper by Gelbach and Kobayashi to highlight the risk that, in assessing the proportionality of proposed discovery under the 2015 amendments to Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, federal judges will privilege costs over benefits, and private over public interests. The risk arises from the temptation to focus on (1) the interests of those who are present to the detriment of the interests of those who are absent (“the availability heuristic”), and (2) variables that …

Discretion In Class Certification, Tobias Barrington Wolff

All Faculty Scholarship

A district court has broad discretion in deciding whether a suit may be maintained as a class action. Variations on this phrase populate the class action jurisprudence of the federal courts. The power of the federal courts to exercise discretion when deciding whether to permit a suit to proceed as a class action has long been treated as an elemental component of a representative proceeding. It is therefore cause for surprise that there is no broad consensus regarding the nature and definition of this judicial discretion in the certification process. The federal courts have not coalesced around a clear or …

Antitrust's "Jurisdictional" Reach Abroad, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

In its Arbaugh decision the Supreme Court insisted that a federal statute’s limitation on reach be regarded as “jurisdictional” only if the legislature was clear that this is what it had in mind. The Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvement Act (FTAIA) presents a puzzle in this regard, because Congress seems to have been quite clear about what it had in mind; it simply failed to use the correct set of buzzwords in the statute itself, and well before Arbaugh assessed this requirement.

Even if the FTAIA is to be regarded as non-jurisdictional, the constitutional extraterritorial reach of the Sherman Act is …

Advocacy Revalued, Geoffrey C. Hazard Jr., Dana A. Remus

All Faculty Scholarship

A central and ongoing debate among legal ethics scholars addresses the moral positioning of adversarial advocacy. Most participants in this debate focus on the structure of our legal system and the constituent role of the lawyer-advocate. Many are highly critical, arguing that the core structure of adversarial advocacy is the root cause of many instances of lawyer misconduct. In this Article, we argue that these scholars’ focuses are misguided. Through reflection on Aristotle’s treatise, Rhetoric, we defend advocacy in our legal system’s litigation process as ethically positive and as pivotal to fair and effective dispute resolution. We recognize that advocacy …

Institutional Practice, Procedural Uniformity, And As-Applied Challenges Under The Rules Enabling Act, Catherine T. Struve

All Faculty Scholarship

The article offers information on the federal practices, uniformity in the actions and challenges faced by Supreme Court in decisions related to the court cases. It assesses the court cases Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, PA v. Allstate Insurance Co. and Hanna v. Plumer and mentions the challenges of jurisdiction in taking decisions.

Foreword: Procedure As Palimpsest, Catherine T. Struve

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Time Out, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Lawyers On The Auction Block: Evaluation And Selection Of Class Counsel By Auction, Jill E. Fisch

All Faculty Scholarship

The lead counsel auction has attracted increasing attention. Auction advocates argue that auctions introduce competitive market forces that improve the selection and compensation of class counsel. The benefits of the auction, the;' claim, include lower legal fees and better representation. Careful scrutiny reveals that auction advocates have overlooked substantial methodological problems with the design and implementation of the lead counsel auction. Even if these problems were overcome, the auction procedure is flawed: Auctions are poor tools for selecting firms based on multiple criteria, compromise the judicial role, and are unlikely to produce reasonable fee awards. Although the existing record is …

The Paradox Of Delegation: Interpreting The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Catherine T. Struve

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Roles Of Litigation, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Introduction To The Principles And Rules Of Transnational Civil Procedure, Geoffrey C. Hazard Jr., Michele Taruffo, Rolf Sturner, Anthony Gidi

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Bitter With The Sweet: Tradition, History, And Limitations On Federal Judicial Power--A Case Study, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Raising Arizona: Reflections On Sovereignty And The Nature Of The Plaintiff In Federal Suits Against States, Catherine T. Struve

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Myth Of Choice Of Law: Rethinking Conflicts, Kermit Roosevelt Iii

All Faculty Scholarship

Choice of law is a mess. That much has become a truism. It is a "dismal swamp," a morass of confusion, a body of doctrine "killed by a realism intended to save it," and now "universally said to be a disaster." One way to demonstrate its tribulations would be to look at the academic dissensus and the hopelessly underdeterminative Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws. Another would be to examine the Supreme Court's abdication of the task of articulating constitutional constraints on state choice-of-law rules. This article will do both. At the outset, though, I want to suggest that one …

The United States' Approach To International Civil Litigation: Recent Developments In Forum Selection, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

An Historical Analysis Of The Binding Nature Of Class Suits, Geoffrey C. Hazard Jr., John L. Gedid, Stephen Sowie

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Retroactivity And Legal Change: An Equilibrium Approach, Jill E. Fisch

All Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, Professor Fisch assesses currrent retroactivity doctrine and proposes a new framework for retroactivity analysis. Current law has failed to reflect the complexity of defining retroactivity and to harmonize the conflicting concerns of efficiency and fairness that animate retroactivity doctrine. By drawing a sharp distinction between adjudication and legislation, the law has also overlooked the similarity of the issues that retroactivity raises in both contexts. Professor Fisch's analysis, influenced by the legal process school, uses an equilibrium approach to connect retroactivity analysis to theories of legal change. Instead of focusing on the nature of the new legal rule, …

The Reluctant Partner: Making Procedural Law For International Civil Litigation, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Ignorance And Procedural Law Reform: A Call For A Moratorium, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Captive Courts: The Destruction Of Judicial Decisions By Agreement Of The Parties, Jill E. Fisch

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Federal Judgments Law: Sources Of Authority And Sources Of Rules, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The World In Our Courts, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Rewriting History: The Propriety Of Eradicating Prior Decisional Law Through Settlement And Vacatur, Jill E. Fisch

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Hold The Corks: A Comment On Paul Carrington's "Substance" And "Procedure" In The Rules Enabling Act, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Costs Of Complexity, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Interjurisdictional Preclusion, Full Faith And Credit And Federal Common Law: A General Approach, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.