Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Civil procedure (3)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (3)
- Electronic discovery (2)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1)
- Abuse of process (1)
-
- Appellate procedure/Civil/North Carolina (1)
- Class certification (1)
- Costs/North Carolina (1)
- Courts (1)
- Depositions (1)
- Discovery (Law) (1)
- Discovery/North Carolina (1)
- Electronic evidence (1)
- Electronic information resources (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Fees (1)
- Interlocutory appeals (1)
- Joinder of actions/North Carolina (1)
- Lawyers (1)
- Legal ethics (1)
- Loss of consortium/North Carolina (1)
- Medical records/North Carolina (1)
- North Carolina (1)
- Offer of judgment/North Carolina (1)
- Pleading (1)
- Proportionality doctrine (1)
- Proportionality in law (1)
- Punitive damages/North Carolina (1)
- Reasonable person standard (1)
- Videotapes (1)
Articles 1 - 12 of 12
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Promise Of A Cooperative And Proportional Discovery Process In North Carolina: House Bill 380 And The New State Electronic Discovery Rules, Brian C. Vick, Neil C. Magnuson
The Promise Of A Cooperative And Proportional Discovery Process In North Carolina: House Bill 380 And The New State Electronic Discovery Rules, Brian C. Vick, Neil C. Magnuson
Campbell Law Review
Using the experience of the federal courts under the 2006 Amendments as a guide, this Article examines H.B. 380 and the effect it will have on the discovery process in the state courts. Part I of this Article describes the litigation challenges created by the proliferation of ESI. Part II describes the history, structure and substance of the 2006 Amendments, and discusses their impact in the areas of cooperation and the use of proportionality principles in the federal courts. Part III describes the substance and structure of the rules changes encompassed by H.B. 380, and analyzes the effect that they …
Reasonableness In E-Discovery, Debra Lyn Bassett
Reasonableness In E-Discovery, Debra Lyn Bassett
Campbell Law Review
Issues of reasonableness arise regularly throughout American law. Reasonableness is a concept central to tort law, which imposes a reasonable person standard in ascertaining duty. Criminal guilt turns on a reasonable doubt standard. And in civil discovery, the concept of reasonableness features prominently: discovery's scope reaches information that is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and discovery cannot be unreasonably cumulative or duplicative. Reasonableness standards require judges to undertake an objective, rather than subjective, evaluation. E-discovery specifically has two significant overarching reasonableness components: reasonable accessibility for production and reasonable care in preservation and disclosure. The interpretation …
Proportionality In Discovery: A Cautionary Tale, John L. Carroll
Proportionality In Discovery: A Cautionary Tale, John L. Carroll
Campbell Law Review
"There has been widespread criticism of the abuse of discovery."' That statement comes not from a recent edition of the Defense Research Institute newsletter but from the Advisory Committee notes to the 1980 amendment that gave us the Rule 26(f) conference. Discovery abuse and the increase in the cost of litigation that flows from such abuse has been a constant theme emerging from analysis of the civil justice system.
How States Can Protect Their Policies In Federal Class Actions, Lucas Watkins
How States Can Protect Their Policies In Federal Class Actions, Lucas Watkins
Campbell Law Review
The role of the states in our constitutional system is to protect their citizens and supply tort liability. Where federal law does not preempt state systems of liability, state law supplies the tort- and contract-based rules that govern the vast majority of the relationships in our society and economy. Some think that national rules of liability, or new national choice-of-law rules, should supplant today's state-by-state regulation. But until Congress enacts a comprehensive regulatory scheme, state law will control the causes of action that plaintiffs can bring. And the state law that controls the cause should control the way that the …
Elevating Form Over Substance: Viar V. North Carolina Department Of Transportation And Its Progeny, Trey Collier
Elevating Form Over Substance: Viar V. North Carolina Department Of Transportation And Its Progeny, Trey Collier
Campbell Law Review
This Comment explores the history of Rule 2 of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure, the controversial ruling of Viar, and how subsequent cases have interpreted the North Carolina Supreme Court's ruling in Viar.
Rule 68 - Should Costs Incurred After The Offer Of Judgment Be Included In Calculating The "Judgment Finally Obtained" - The So-Called Novel Issue In Roberts V. Swain, Jonathan R. Bumgarner
Rule 68 - Should Costs Incurred After The Offer Of Judgment Be Included In Calculating The "Judgment Finally Obtained" - The So-Called Novel Issue In Roberts V. Swain, Jonathan R. Bumgarner
Campbell Law Review
This article analyzes use of force law under North Carolina and federal standards. This article emphasizes methodology and leading Supreme Court, Fourth Circuit and North Carolina cases. Statutory and common law use of force standards under North Carolina law including self defense and apparent dangers are explored. The article analyzes the prevailing federal liability standards which are employed in determining whether use of force is excessive, particularly in "mistaken belief' cases. Finally, the nature of expert testimony typically admissible in use of force litigation is reviewed.
The Substantial Right Doctrine And Interlocutory Appeals, J. Brad Donovan
The Substantial Right Doctrine And Interlocutory Appeals, J. Brad Donovan
Campbell Law Review
One does not have the right to appeal from an interlocutory order except in certain circumstances. In this Article, Mr. Donovan focuses on the right to appeal based on the substantial right doctrine. This subject was addressed by Justice Willis P. Whichard in an article published in 1984, and Mr. Donovan continues the work in this area with a study of the subsequent case law. The Article carries forward the format used by Justice Whichard -presenting the law according to the subject area of the law. The twenty-four subject areas are organized alphabetically to facilitate the use of the Article …
Functions Of Rule 12(B)(6) In The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure: A Categorization Approach, Yoichiro Hamabe
Functions Of Rule 12(B)(6) In The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure: A Categorization Approach, Yoichiro Hamabe
Campbell Law Review
The purpose of this article is to clarify the function of Rule 12(b)(6) under liberalized pleading. To achieve this clarification, this article examines the functions of Rule 12(b)(6) by using a categorization approach. Before entering the categorization, the previous controversies over the two opposing directions should be also considered. Accordingly, the functions of Rule 12(b)(6) were researched by reviewing several fundamental questions concerning this obscure Rule.
Examining Didonato'S Damage Limitations And Mandatory Joinder Requirements - Greer V. Parsons, John M. Mccabe
Examining Didonato'S Damage Limitations And Mandatory Joinder Requirements - Greer V. Parsons, John M. Mccabe
Campbell Law Review
This Note will outline the evolution of wrongful death actions, with particular attention being given to the inclusion of unborn children under the providing statutes. It also traces North Carolina's legislative and judicial treatment of wrongful death actions. Next, the Note will discuss the inconsistencies created by ruling that pecuniary loss and loss of society and companionship cannot be recovered as a matter of law in a wrongful death action brought on behalf of viable fetus. It will argue that instead ,of limiting recovery as a matter of law, such damages should be addressed on a case-by-case basis and the …
The Video Deposition As A Civil Litigation Tool, Hugh B. Lewis
The Video Deposition As A Civil Litigation Tool, Hugh B. Lewis
Campbell Law Review
This Comment reports the findings of a research project on the video deposition's place in litigation. Professor Thomas P. Anderson, Norman Adrian Wiggins School of Law, supervised the project. The paper looks at video depositions from three perspectives. The first perspective outlines 30(b)(4)'s evolution through the court's interpretation of the rule. The second perspective synthesizes the many suggestions on video deposition production found in legal journals. The third perspective analyzes and collates empirical data collected from attorneys and jurors who participated in nine civil trials which used video depositions in the North Carolina Superior Court system. The empirical data also …
Civil Procedure - Discovery Of Medical Records In A Corporate Negligence Action - Shelton V. Morehead Memorial Hospital, G. Bruce Park
Civil Procedure - Discovery Of Medical Records In A Corporate Negligence Action - Shelton V. Morehead Memorial Hospital, G. Bruce Park
Campbell Law Review
This Note will examine the impact of the Shelton decision on requests for the production of hospital records. The Note will emphasize the application of Shelton to corporate negligence actions against a hospital for breach of a duty owed by the hospital directly to the patient. The Note will suggest that, although the Shelton court limited the availability of discovery, diligent plaintiffs may find trial courts less likely to allow a blanket privilege for hospitals claiming immunity from discovery for records conveniently labeled as products of medical review committees. This Note will argue that the plaintiff in a corporate negligence …
Practice And Procedure Under Amended Rule 11 Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Kevin P. Roddy, William Woodward Webb
Practice And Procedure Under Amended Rule 11 Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Kevin P. Roddy, William Woodward Webb
Campbell Law Review
The purpose of this article is to explore the substantive provisions of amended Rule 11 and its historic antecedents, the procedure by which sanctions may be sought and/or imposed, the sanctions which the court may impose and the persons upon whom the sanctions can be imposed.