Litigation Commons^™

Review Essay: Using All Available Information, Max Huffman

ExpressO

This is a review essay entitled “Using All Available Information,” in which I review and comment on Justice Stephen Breyer’s new book, Active Liberty: Interpreting Our Democratic Constitution, published in September 2005. Justice Breyer’s book, adapted from the Tanner Lectures given in 2005 at Harvard Law School, serves partly as a response to Justice Scalia’s 1997 volume A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law. I review Justice Breyer’s book in part by comparison to and contrast with Justice Scalia’s. I propose that much about Justice Breyer’s interpretive philosophy, which centers on determining the “purposes” of texts and interpreting …

Final Offer Arbitration In The New Era Of Major League Baseball, Spencer B. Gordon

ExpressO

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the economic, athletic, and social impact of final offer salary arbitration in Major League Baseball (“MLB”). The article delves into the motivations, fluctuations, and evolution of the player-owner relationship and free agency. The commentary then focuses on the distinguishing features and intricacies of final offer arbitration. Although salary arbitration in the context of Major League Baseball is a topic oft discussed in the law review setting, the analysis rarely reaches the level exhibited in this article. Moreover, most articles on the subject were written between 1996 and 2000 when the 1994 players’ strike …

Finding New Constitutional Rights Through The Supreme Court’S Evolving “Government Purpose” Test Under Minimum Scrutiny, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

By now we all are familiar with the litany of cases which refused to find elevated scrutiny for so-called “affirmative” or “social” rights such as education, welfare or housing: Lindsey v. Normet, San Antonio School District v. Rodriguez, Dandridge v. Williams, DeShaney v. Winnebago County. There didn’t seem to be anything in minimum scrutiny which could protect such facts as education or housing, from government action. However, unobtrusively and over the years, the Supreme Court has clarified and articulated one aspect of minimum scrutiny which holds promise for vindicating facts. You will recall that under minimum scrutiny government’s action is …

Using Capture Theory And Chronology In Eminent Domain Proceedings, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

Capture theory--in which private purpose is substituted for government purpose--sheds light on a technique which is coming into greater use post-Kelo v. New London. That case affirmed that eminent domain use need only be rationally related to a legitimate government purpose. Capture theory focuses litigators' attention on "government purpose." That is a question of fact for the trier of fact. This article shows how to use civil discovery in order to show the Court that private purpose has been substituted for government purpose. If it has, the eminent domain use fails, because the use does not meet minimum scrutiny. This …

Active Water Resource Management: Tools For Better Water Management, John D'Antonio

Publications

No abstract provided.

Water For Energy In The Southwest: Where Will It Come From?, Marilyn C. O'Leary

Publications

No abstract provided.

Water For Energy In The Southwest: Finding Water For Mohave, Stanley M. Pollack

Publications

No abstract provided.

Why Does The Chesapeake Bay Need Litigators?, Jon A. Mueller, Joseph Tannery

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Amending Perpetual Conservation Easements: A Case Study Of The Myrtle Grove Controversy, Nancy A. Mclaughlin

University of Richmond Law Review

This article explores the issue of amending perpetual conservation easements by examining the Myrtle Grove controversy, in which the National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States (the "National Trust")" "conceptually approved" a request made by a successor owner of land encumbered by a perpetual conservation easement to substantially amend the easement. Several months later, as a result of public opposition to the amendments and a reassessment of its position, the National Trust withdrew that approval. The owner of the encumbered land subsequently filed a suit for breach of contract, and the National Trust and the Attorney General of …

Medical Malpractice Litigation And Tort Reform: It's The Incentives, Stupid, David A. Hyman, Charles Silver

Vanderbilt Law Review

Health care providers and tort reformers invariably claim that the medical malpractice litigation system is rife with behaviors that are irrational, unpredictable, and counter-productive. They attack civil juries, asserting that verdicts are skyrocketing without reason, are highly variable, and bear little or no relation to the merits of plaintiffs' claims. They complain about patients, arguing that the few with valid claims sue rarely, while the many who receive non- negligent treatment sue all the time. They attack greedy lawyers, alleging that they rake in obscene profits by routinely filing frivolous complaints. They complain that compensation flows almost randomly, winding up …

Provincializing Transitional Justice: Reading The International Criminal Tribunal For Rwanda Against The Grain, Jatin Dua

Archived Theses and Dissertations

No abstract provided.

The Z-Test For Percentages: A Statistical Tool To Detect Pretextually Neutral Juror Challenges, Marvin L. Longabaugh

ExpressO

In the article, I discuss the potential use of public opinion polls to measure the discriminatory effect of certain questions in jury selection. While the laws surrounding race and gender based jury selection are known to most lawyers, there has been little scrutiny on questions that might be posed to potential jurors that are facially neutral, yet have a discriminatory impact. This article examines a number of such questions and offers a statistical test to determine whether a proposed question has, in fact, a 98% certainty of having a discriminatory effect if relied upon in jury selection.

The Application Of Federal Common Law To Overcome Conflicting State Laws In The Supplemental Disgorgement Proceedings Of An Sec Appointed Receiver, Gauhar Naseem

ExpressO

In spite of the Erie doctrine, the application of federal common law has survived to overcome conflicting state laws in diversity actions where a federal law, interest or function is implicated. A federal court’s authority to substantively implement a federal common law rule over state law is clearest when the party to the action is a federal entity, namely an agency of the U.S. Government deriving its authority from the Constitution or some source of federal law. Analyzing such authority becomes more difficult in circumstances where parties to a diversity lawsuit are private citizens (not necessarily possessing any direct federal …

Judicial Discretion To Condition, Thomas O. Main

ExpressO

The task of judging has been described as the art or science of making discrete choices among competing courses of action. Charged with the mandate to administer justice fairly and equitably, judges are said to have discretion to pursue any lawful course. In both criminal and civil cases, and regarding matters profound and trivial, the exercise of discretion is a core judicial function. The exercise of discretion is often characterized by vivid metaphors: judges confront a frame of possibilities, a zone, a range, a doughnut hole, two paths or a fork in the road, a fenced pasture.

Above all else, …

Spread Spectrum Is Good-But It Does Not Obsolete Nbc V. U.S.!, Charles Jackson, Raymond Pickholtz, Dale Hatfield

Federal Communications Law Journal

The Authors criticize recent statements by leading legal commentators suggesting that the development of spread spectrum has eliminated radio interference and helped make the underlying legal foundations for regulating spectrum obsolete. The Authors provide a non-technical explanation of how spread spectrum works and why it does not have the effect of eliminating radio interference. The Authors conclude that new technologies are likely to increase the availability of usable spectrum, but they have not wiped out the problem of interference.

Brand X And The Wireline Broadband Report And Order: The Beginning Of The End Of The Distinction Between Title I And Title Ii Services, J. Steven Rich

Federal Communications Law Journal

This Article traces the development of the FCC's distinction between "telecommunications services" subject to common carrier services under Title II of the 1934 Communications Act and "information services" regulated under Title I of the Act from the Computer Inquiry line of cases through the Brand X decision and recent Wireline Broadband Report and Order. The Author pays particular attention to the Brand X decision and the FCC's Wireline Broadband Order and its implications, suggesting that the Order may be subject to reversal when it is challenged in court and proposing how the Commission might react to a reversal. The Author …

What's Wrong With Being Creative And Aggressive?, W. Bradley Wendel

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

When I tell people that I am a law professor specializing in legal ethics, they usually have one of two reactions: “Legal ethics—that’s an oxymoron!” or “I bet you always have a lot to do.” The second reaction is the more interesting of the two, because it rightly implies that legal ethics is a fascinating field, in part because lawyers are always thinking of new ways to get into trouble. Many run-of-the-mill lawyer disciplinary cases involve simple wrongdoing, such as stealing from client funds, which does not present conceptually interesting issues. Contemporary high-profile legal ethics scandals, by contrast, are made …

A Taxonomy Of Obesity Litigation, Theodore H. Frank

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Setting The Stage For Public Health: The Role Of Litigation In Controlling Obesity, Jason A. Smith

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Jurisdiction To Adjudicate: A Revised Analysis, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Personal jurisdiction doctrine as articulated by the Supreme Court is in disarray. As a constitutional doctrine whose contours remain imprecise, the law of personal jurisdiction has generated confusion, unpredictability, and extensive satellite litigation over what should be an uncomplicated preliminary issue. Many commentators have long lamented these defects, making suggestions for how the doctrine could be improved. Although many of these proposals have had much to offer, they generally have failed to articulate (or adequately justify or explain) a simple and sound approach to jurisdiction that the Supreme Court can embrace. This Article revises the law of personal jurisdiction by …

Detailing Daubert, The Hon. E Richard Webber, Dana M. Malkus

All Faculty Scholarship

When Justice Blackmun wrote Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), the assignment was to reconcile the standards governing the admissibility of expert testimony with Federal Rule of Evidence 702. As Justice Blackmun recognized, Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923), had long served as the polestar for determining the admissibility of expert testimony in litigation. Although the test developed by the Frye court was ultimately rejected when the Supreme Court announced new rules regarding the admissibility of expert testimony, the Frye court’s recognition of the purpose behind admitting expert testimony remains instructional: …

Information, Litigation, And Common Law Evolution, Keith N. Hylton

Faculty Scholarship

It is common in the legal academy to describe judicial decision trends leading to new common law rules as resulting from conscious judicial effort. Evolutionary models of litigation, in contrast, treat common law as resulting from pressure applied by litigants. One apparent difficulty in the theory of litigation is explaining how trends in judicial decisions favoring one litigant, and biasing the legal standard, could occur. This article presents a model in which an apparent bias in the legal standard can occur in the absence of any effort toward this end on the part of judges. Trends can develop favoring the …

Reverse Bifurcation, Dru Stevenson

ExpressO

Reverse bifurcation is a trial procedure in which the jury determines damages first, before determining liability. The liability phase of the trial rarely occurs, because the parties usually settle once they know the value of the case. This procedure is already being used in thousands of cases – nearly all the asbestos and Fen-phen cases – but this is the first academic article devoted to the subject. This article explains the history of the procedure and analyzes why it encourages settlements, simplifies jury instructions, and produces better outcomes for the parties.

The Overlapping Magisteria Of Law And Science: When Litigation And Science Collide, William G. Childs

ExpressO

The Supreme Court’s 1993 decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals transformed courts’ evaluation of expert testimony. Many courts, applying Daubert, focus extensively on whether the purported expert’s methodology has been published in a peer-reviewed journal.

This focus on peer review results in two unintended consequences that have triggered criticism: litigation-driven scholarship and litigants taking discovery into the peer review process. Critics contend that litigation-driven scholarship is irredeemably biased and that peer review discovery is too often an effort to intimidate scholars from speaking on subjects of public concern.

In this Article, I explore these phenomena and the criticisms of …

The Dutch Auction Myth, Peter B. Oh

ExpressO

The initial public offering process is under assault. Critics of this process have woven a complex set of interconnected objections to the orthodox method for conducting IPOs, pricing of shares, and allocating them to preferred investors. These critics instead point to online auctions as an alternative IPO method that can provide more equitable access, efficient prices, and egalitarian allocations. These claims rest on Google’s recent IPO and W.R. Hambrecht + Co.’s OpenIPO mechanism, conventionally regarded as impure variants of what is known as a descending-bid or Dutch auction (Dutch IPO).

This article assesses the empirical and theoretical case for Dutch …

An Idea Whose Time Has (Sort Of) Come: Bapcpa Provides Direct Appeals From Bankruptcy Courts To Circuit Courts In Limited Situations, David George

ExpressO

This article deals with a provision in the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 that allows direct appeals from bankruptcy courts to circuit courts. For years, many have sought direct appeals to circuit courts, contending that it will increase certainty in bankruptcy proceedings and make them more efficient. This article describes the new direct-appeal provision and discusses the procedures that are being developed.

The Action Bias In American Law: Internet Jurisdiction And The Triumph Of Zippo Dot Com, Richard Greenstein

ExpressO

American law reflects the stories we tell ourselves about who we are as a nation. To illustrate the effect of America’s stories on the law, I identify and describe in this essay a particular characteristic of American law: an “action bias” – a propensity to bestow disproportionately greater legal significance upon affirmative acts than on failures to act – and I argue that this bias reflects, in turn, a powerful myth at the core of the self-image of the United States, a myth I call the “Immigrant’s Tale.”

To illustrate this thesis, I give a number of instances of the …

Joinder & Severance Of Offenses, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Closing Argument: Prosecution Misconduct, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Joinder & Severance Of Defendants, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.