Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (4)
- Facts (2)
- Law reform (2)
- 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) (1)
- Access to information (1)
-
- Alien Tort Statute (1)
- Arbitration (1)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal (1)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (1)
- Burdens of litigation (1)
- Customary international law (1)
- Damages (1)
- Deference (1)
- Discovery (1)
- Discovery orders (1)
- Discretion (1)
- Duty of fair representation (1)
- Empirical studies (1)
- English Law (1)
- Estoppel (1)
- Exclusivity (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Fitzpatrick v. International Ry (1)
- Foreign or international tribunal (1)
- Foreign policy (1)
- Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (1)
- Incorporation (1)
- Indian law (1)
- Indian tribes (1)
- Information (1)
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
The Death Knell And The Wild West: Two Dangers Of Domestic Discovery In Foreign Adjudications, Shay M. Collins
The Death Knell And The Wild West: Two Dangers Of Domestic Discovery In Foreign Adjudications, Shay M. Collins
Michigan Law Review
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a), parties to foreign legal proceedings can obtain discovery orders from United States federal courts. In other words, if a foreign party needs physical evidence located in—or testimony from a person residing in—the United States to support their claim or defense, they can ask a district court to order the production of that evidence. For almost two decades, § 1782(a) practice has operated as a procedural Wild West. Judges routinely consider § 1782(a) applications ex parte—that is, without giving the parties subject to the resulting discovery orders a chance to oppose them—and grant those applications at …
Predicting Supreme Court Behavior In Indian Law Cases, Grant Christensen
Predicting Supreme Court Behavior In Indian Law Cases, Grant Christensen
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
This piece builds upon Matthew Fletcher’s call for additional empirical work in Indian law by creating a new dataset of Indian law opinions. The piece takes every Indian law case decided by the Supreme Court from the beginning of the Warren Court until the end of the 2019-2020 term. The scholarship first produces an Indian law scorecard that measures how often each Justice voted for the “pro- Indian” outcome. It then compares those results to the Justice’s political ideology to suggest that while there is a general trend that a more “liberal” Justice is more likely to favor the pro-Indian …
Stipulating The Law, Gary Lawson
Stipulating The Law, Gary Lawson
Michigan Law Review
In Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the Supreme Court decided important questions of structural constitutionalism on the assumption, shared by all of the parties, that members of the Securities and Exchange Commission are not removable at will by the president. Four Justices strongly challenged the majority's willingness to accept what amounts to a stipulation by the parties to a controlling issue of law. As a general matter the American legal system does not allow parties to stipulate to legal conclusions, though it welcomes and encourages stipulations to matters of fact. I argue that one ought to …
New Pleading, New Discovery, Scott Dodson
New Pleading, New Discovery, Scott Dodson
Michigan Law Review
Pleading in federal court has a new narrative. The old narrative was one of notice, with the goal of broad access to the civil justice system. New Pleading, after the landmark Supreme Court cases of Twombly and Iqbal, is focused on factual sufficiency, with the purpose of screening out meritless cases that otherwise might impose discovery costs on defendants. The problem with New Pleading is that factual insufficiency often is a poor proxy for meritlessness. Some plaintifs lack sufficient factual knowledge of the elements of their claims not because the claims lack merit but because the information they need is …
Duty Of Fair Representation Jurisprudential Reform: The Need To Adjudicate Disputes In Internal Union Review Tribunals And The Forgotten Remedy Of Re-Arbitration, Mitchell H. Rubinstein
Duty Of Fair Representation Jurisprudential Reform: The Need To Adjudicate Disputes In Internal Union Review Tribunals And The Forgotten Remedy Of Re-Arbitration, Mitchell H. Rubinstein
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
One of the best kept secrets in American labor law is that duty of fair representation jurisprudence simply does not work. It does not work for plaintiff union members because they must satisfy a close-to-impossible burden of proof and have a short statute of limitations window in which to assert their claim. It does not work for defendant unions because they are often forced to file pointless grievances in order to avoid the cost of litigation. It does not work for defendant employers because they are often brought into these lawsuits because they have the "deep pockets."
This Article makes …
Not Just Doctrine: The True Motivation For Federal Incorporation And International Human Rights Litigation, Daniel Abebe
Not Just Doctrine: The True Motivation For Federal Incorporation And International Human Rights Litigation, Daniel Abebe
Michigan Journal of International Law
This Article challenges the universalist theory of international law upon which federal incorporation of CIL and international human rights litigation rely. It unpacks the international relations (IR) theory paradigms that support the universalist theory, and discusses a competing theory that views state compliance with international law as a function of national self-interest. Working from this perspective, it proposes a framework to evaluate the wisdom of federal incorporation of CIL and the wisdom of international human rights litigation. The framework suggests that federal incorporation of CIL generates sovereignty costs for the United States, and that international human rights litigation complicates the …
Judicial Discretion: Is One More Of A Good Thing Too Much?, David B. Sentelle
Judicial Discretion: Is One More Of A Good Thing Too Much?, David B. Sentelle
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Judicial Discretion by Aharon Barak
Res Judicata-Use Defensively Of Former Judgment By One Not A Party Or In Privity With A Party To Former Action, Richard H. Conn
Res Judicata-Use Defensively Of Former Judgment By One Not A Party Or In Privity With A Party To Former Action, Richard H. Conn
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff sued defendant in a federal district court to foreclose a mortgage lien alleged to exist on defendant's land in consequence of a loan by plaintiff to defendant's predecessor in title. Defendant's land was but a part of the tract originally encumbered. In a prior action in the state court, plaintiff had sought foreclosure of the same mortgage against the holder of another parcel of the mortgaged land on the precise grounds now asserted against defendant. In that action it was held that the entire mortgage had already been discharged. Defendant moved for summary judgment, contending that the former decision …
Substance And Procedure In The Conflict Of Laws, Edgar H. Ailes
Substance And Procedure In The Conflict Of Laws, Edgar H. Ailes
Michigan Law Review
It is perhaps the most inveterate doctrine of the conflict of laws that all questions of procedure in a given instance are governed by the lex fori, or the law of the court invoked, regardless of the law under which the substantive rights of the parties accrued. For seven centuries, at least, courts and lawyers have broadly stated or assumed to be axiomatic the rule that substantive rights are fixed and immutable whilst the procedural devices by which such rights may be vindicated and enforced depend solely upon the law of the forum.