Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility
Legal Ethics And Class Actions: Problems, Tactics And Judicial Responses, Richard H. Underwood
Legal Ethics And Class Actions: Problems, Tactics And Judicial Responses, Richard H. Underwood
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
Perhaps no procedural innovation has generated more controversy than the class action. As Professor Arthur Miller has observed, debate over “class action problem[s]” has raged at several different levels. For example, opponents and proponents of class actions disagree on whether such actions produce socially desirable results in an economical fashion and whether an already overburdened judiciary can handle the additional supervisory demands of the class action. Recently, a somewhat more ideological dialogue has addressed the merit of publicly funded class actions. Such questions arise only indirectly in the context of class action litigation. However, a certain hostility toward class actions …
Adversary Ethics: More Dirty Tricks, Richard H. Underwood
Adversary Ethics: More Dirty Tricks, Richard H. Underwood
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
In this article the author provides a primer on the more common forms of cheating employed by trial lawyers. Another purpose is to suggest that there are antidotes that may be administered to curb these abuses, assuming that trial attorneys are alert enough to invoke them, and trial judges are willing to apply them.
Curbing Litigation Abuses: Judicial Control Of Adversary Ethics—The Model Rules Of Professional Conduct And Proposed Amendments To The Rules Of Civil Procedure, Richard H. Underwood
Curbing Litigation Abuses: Judicial Control Of Adversary Ethics—The Model Rules Of Professional Conduct And Proposed Amendments To The Rules Of Civil Procedure, Richard H. Underwood
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
This Article addresses the effectiveness of recent developments and proposals related to abusive litigation, and discusses them in the context of recent opinions illustrating the power of the trial judge to control the excesses of the adversary system. It rejects the countersuit as a time-consuming and costly means of controlling litigation abuses, and concludes that “tinkering changes” in the rules of procedure cannot bring about true reform. It is urged here that the burden resulting from abuse of litigation can only be relieved by changes which foster stronger judicial control of adversarial ethics, and greater judicial involvement in the pretrial …