Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- 17 U.S.C. 901 (1)
- 17 U.S.C. 902 (1)
- 17 U.S.C. 903 (1)
- 17 U.S.C. 904 (1)
- Altera v. Clear Logic (1)
-
- Asbestos; civil litigation (1)
- Brooktree v. Advanced Micro Devices (1)
- Circuitboard design (1)
- Civil Litigation; Prens Patriae; Opioid (1)
- Class actions; civil litigation; FICALA (1)
- Class actions; civil litigation; civil procedure (1)
- Class actions; class definition; civil litigation; civil procedure (1)
- Copyright (1)
- Federal rights; private enforcement; litigation (1)
- Jurisdiction; forum; civil procedure; civil litigation (1)
- Mask work (1)
- Microfabrication (1)
- Multidistrict litigation; civil procedure; civil litigation (1)
- Patent (1)
- Photolithography (1)
- Piracy (1)
- R&D (1)
- Research and development (1)
- Reverse engineering (1)
- SCPA (1)
- Semiconductor Chip Protection Act (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Litigation
The Role Of Direct-Injury Government-Entity Lawsuits In The Opioid Litigation, Edgar Aliferov
The Role Of Direct-Injury Government-Entity Lawsuits In The Opioid Litigation, Edgar Aliferov
Fordham Law Review
The opioid epidemic has ravaged the United States, killing over 100 Americans every day and costing the nation upward of $90 billion a year. All branches and levels of the government have pursued measures to combat the epidemic and reduce its societal costs. Perhaps the most interesting response is the emergence of direct-injury government-entity lawsuits, which seek to recover damages from opioid companies that facilitated prescription pill addictions. Cities, counties, and states across the country are suing opioid manufacturers and distributors in unprecedented numbers. This Note explores the role of direct-injury government-entity claims as compared to other forms of civil …
Rights And Retrenchment In The Trump Era, Stephen B. Burbank, Sean Farhang
Rights And Retrenchment In The Trump Era, Stephen B. Burbank, Sean Farhang
Fordham Law Review
Our aim in this Article is to leverage the archival research, data, and theoretical perspectives presented in our book, Rights and Retrenchment: The Counterrevolution against Federal Litigation, to illuminate the prospects for retrenchment in the current political landscape. In the book, we documented how an outpouring of rights-creating legislation from Democratic Congresses in the 1960s and 1970s, much of which contained provisions designed to stimulate private enforcement, prompted the conservative legal movement within the Republican Party to devise a response. Recognizing the political infeasibility of retrenching substantive rights, the movement’s strategy was to weaken the infrastructure for enforcing them. …
What We Don't Know About Class Actions But Hope To Know Soon, Jonah B. Gelbach, Deborah R. Hensler
What We Don't Know About Class Actions But Hope To Know Soon, Jonah B. Gelbach, Deborah R. Hensler
Fordham Law Review
Legislation that would alter class action practice in the federal courts has been pending in Congress. Nearly a decade’s worth of U.S. Supreme Court cases have restricted the scope and ease of use of the class action device. Class action critics argue that class litigation is a “racket” that fails to compensate plaintiffs and instead enriches plaintiffs’ lawyers at the expense of legitimate business practices. On the other hand, defenders of class actions decry the legislative and judicial forces aligned against them, warning that trends in class action law will eviscerate the practical rights held by consumers and workers. In …
Jurisdiction In The Trump Era, Scott Dodson
Jurisdiction In The Trump Era, Scott Dodson
Fordham Law Review
The election of Donald Trump as President of the United States induced immediate speculation about how his tenure would affect various areas of the law. In civil-procedure circles, the intuition is that his status as a probusiness, antiregulation Republican seems likely to push procedural doctrine generally in pro-defendant directions. That intuition seems sound in the specific procedural subtopic of jurisdictional doctrine relating to forum selection. In this Essay, I document recent pre-Trump, pro-defendant trends in personal jurisdiction and diversity jurisdiction, and I detail how those trends impose significant burdens on plaintiffs. I then explain why the remainder of Trump’s presidency …
Asbestos Trust Transparency, Mark A. Behrens
Asbestos Trust Transparency, Mark A. Behrens
Fordham Law Review
Originally and for many years, the primary defendants in asbestos cases were companies that mined asbestos or manufactured amphibole-containing thermal insulation. Hundreds of thousands of claims were filed against the major asbestos producers, such as Johns-Manville Corp., Owens Corning Corp., and W.R. Grace & Co. By the late 1990s, asbestos litigation had reached such proportions that the U.S. Supreme Court noted the “elephantine mass” of cases and referred to the litigation as a “crisis.” Mass filings pressured “most of the lead defendants and scores of other companies” into bankruptcy, including virtually all manufacturers of asbestos-containing thermal insulation. Following a 2000–2002 …
Civil Litigation Reform In The Trump Era: Threats And Opportunities Searching For Salvageable Ideas In Ficala, Howard M. Erichson
Civil Litigation Reform In The Trump Era: Threats And Opportunities Searching For Salvageable Ideas In Ficala, Howard M. Erichson
Fordham Law Review
The Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act of 2017 (FICALA) was introduced in Congress less than three weeks after Donald Trump took office as President. Supported by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and opposed by consumer advocates and civil rights groups, the bill passed the House of Representatives one month after its introduction on a party-line vote of 220 to 201, with 220 Republicans and zero Democrats voting in favor. FICALA stalled in the Senate and, as of this writing, does not appear to be moving toward passage in its current form. But reform ideas have a way of reappearing, …
The Looming Battle For Control Of Multidistrict Litigation In Historical Perspective, Andrew D. Bradt
The Looming Battle For Control Of Multidistrict Litigation In Historical Perspective, Andrew D. Bradt
Fordham Law Review
2018 marks fifty years since the passage of the Multidistrict Litigation Act. But instead of thoughts of a golden-anniversary celebration, an old Rodney Dangerfield one-liner comes to mind: “[M]y last birthday cake looked like a prairie fire.” Indeed, after a long period of relative obscurity, multidistrict litigation (MDL) has become a subject of major controversy—and not only among scholars of procedure. For a long time, both within and beyond the rarified world of procedure scholars, MDL was perceived as the more technical, less extreme cousin of the class action, which attracted most of the controversy. My goal in this Article …
A Bridge Between Copyright And Patent Law: Towards A Modern-Day Reapplication Of The Semiconductor Chip Protection Act, Timothy T. Hsieh
A Bridge Between Copyright And Patent Law: Towards A Modern-Day Reapplication Of The Semiconductor Chip Protection Act, Timothy T. Hsieh
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
This Paper analyzes the history of the Semiconductor Chip Protection Act (SCPA), 17 U.S.C. §§ 901–914, and asks why the statute is so seldom used in intellectual property litigation. Afterwards, this Paper makes the argument that the SCPA should be used more in intellectual property litigation, perhaps in tandem with patent litigation, and can be a viable form of protection for semiconductor micro-fabrication companies or integrated circuit design companies engaged in pioneering innovations within the cutting-edge field of semiconductor technology.
Class Problem!: Why The Inconsistent Application Of Rule 23'S Class Certification Requirements During Overbreadth Analysis Is A Threat To Litigant Certainty, David I. Berman
Fordham Law Review
Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is home to the class action device. It is well-documented that this rule significantly impacts our legal system. As a result, the need for its effective utilization has been apparent since its introduction. Despite this, federal courts have inconsistently applied the rule during their analyses of overbroad class definitions at the class certification stage. Consequently, parties involved in such litigation have been exposed to unnecessary costs and the potential for forum shopping. Nonetheless, this judicial inconsistency has gone largely unrecognized because it does not implicate the results of class certification. Hence, …
Resolving The Crisis In U.S. Merger Regulation: A Transatlantic Alternative To The Perpetual Litigation Machine, Dan Awrey, Blanaid Clarke, Sean J. Griffith
Resolving The Crisis In U.S. Merger Regulation: A Transatlantic Alternative To The Perpetual Litigation Machine, Dan Awrey, Blanaid Clarke, Sean J. Griffith
Faculty Scholarship
Regulation by litigation has driven U.S. merger regulation to crisis. The reliance on private lawsuits to police disclosures and potential conflicts of interest in mergers, takeovers, and other control transactions has resulted in the filing of claims after every major transaction. However, it has failed to achieve meaningful benefits for shareholders and has instead deprived them of potentially valuable rights. Regulation by litigation has devolved into attorney rent-seeking, and the raft of substantive and procedural reforms aimed at resolving the crisis has failed. There is an alternative to regulation by litigation. Drawing upon the code and panel-based models of merger …