Law Commons^™

Rule 60(B)(4): When The Courts Of Limited Jurisdiction Yield To Finality, Stephen E. Ludovici

Florida Law Review

It is basic hornbook law—affirmed by courts across time and space repeatedly and unequivocally—that subject-matter jurisdiction cannot be waived. However, in the context of a Rule 60(b)(4) motion seeking relief from a void final judgment after the time for appeal has expired, the onerous standard of review used by courts causes subject-matter jurisdiction to be practically—and frequently—waived in favor of the finality of the judgment. While an onerous standard is tolerable where the court issuing the judgment explicitly found subject-matter jurisdiction, an onerous standard is unacceptable where the court did not do so in light of the federal courts’ limited …

The Lock-In Effect Of Preliminary Injunctions, Kevin J. Lynch

Florida Law Review

One important bias economists and psychologists have identified is the lock-in effect. The lock-in effect causes a decision maker who must revisit an earlier decision to be locked in to that earlier decision. The effect is particularly pronounced where the earlier decision led to the investment of resources that cannot be recovered. Although lock-in does not prevent the decision maker from altering course, it does introduce a systemic bias that should be taken into account.

Preliminary injunctions require judges to assess the merits of a case at an early stage and then revisit the merits later. In the early stages …

Introspection Through Litigation, Joanna C. Schwartz

Notre Dame Law Review

This Article contends that there is a bright side to being sued: organizational defendants can learn valuable information about their own behavior from lawsuits brought against them. Complaints describe allegations of wrongdoing. The discovery process unearths documents and testimony regarding plaintiffs’ allegations. And in summary judgment briefs, expert reports, pretrial orders, and trial, parties marshal the evidence to support their claims. Each of these aspects of civil litigation can bring to the surface information that an organization does not have or has not previously identified, collected, or recognized as valuable. This information, placed in the hands of an organization’s leaders …

The Breaking Of A Wave: Jacobsen V. Allstate Ins. Co. And Class Certification, Lucas Hamilton

Montana Law Review

No abstract provided.

Conflicting Requirements Of Notice: The Incorporation Of Rule 9(B) Into The False Claims Act's First-To-File Bar, Brian D. Howe

Michigan Law Review

Intended to prevent fraud against the government, the False Claims Act (“FCA”) contains a qui tam provision allowing private individuals, known as relators, to bring suits on behalf of the government and receive a portion of the damages. At the heart of the qui tam provision lies the first-to-file bar, which provides that, once a first relator has filed a complaint, subsequent relators are prohibited from coming forward with complaints based on the facts underlying the first relator’s pending action. A circuit split has recently emerged regarding the incorporation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b)’s heightened pleading standard into …

"New Wine In An Old Bottle": The Advent Of Social Media Discovery In Pennsylvania Civil Litigation Matters, Daniel E. Cummins

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

International Mass Tort Litigation: Forum Non Conveniens And The Adequate Alternative Forum In Light Of The Bhopal Disaster, Stephen L. Cummings

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Reflections On Judicial Jurisdiction In International Cases, Gary B. Born

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Erie's International Effect, Michael Steven Green

Northwestern University Law Review

To what extent does the Erie doctrine apply in an international context? In his article When Erie Goes International, Professor Childress argues that a federal court choosing between state law and the law of a foreign nation should often (or perhaps always) ignore Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. and use federal choice of law rules rather than the rules of the state where the federal court is located. In this Essay, I have three points to make in response. The first is that Childress’s article, even if successful, leaves the bulk of the Erie doctrine unchanged in …

Jury Certification Of Federal Securities Fraud Class Actions, Thomas Kayes

Northwestern University Law Review

The rough equivalence of certification and ultimate outcome is class action dogma. If certification is granted, then the plaintiff “wins” by settlement because the risk of incurring class-wide liability by going to trial is too great. If certification is denied, the defendant “wins” because the case may not be worth litigating without the possibility of a class-wide recovery. This Note is about where the dogma is wrong. There are now cases where a denial of certification, just like a grant, presents to the defendant the risk of incurring class-wide liability at trial. This is because those cases are capable of …

Recognizing Discrimination: Lessons From White Plaintiffs, Wendy Parker

Florida Law Review

The Supreme Court has developed a robust equal protection jurisprudence to recognize the rights of whites complaining of race conscious governmental activity. This was particularly reflected in the Court’s opinion in Parents Involved, where the Roberts Court radically repositioned the meaning of Brown v. Board of Education. That opinion all but guarantees that eventually Abigail Noel Fisher will win her case against the University of Texas. In the meantime, however, the case also holds promise for minority plaintiffs. While many have lamented Parents Involved and its use of Brown, we have missed the promise of the Roberts …

Retroactive Application Of State Long-Arm Statutes, Dane Reed Ullian

Florida Law Review

A precondition to a court’s exercising any measure of authority over an individual or an entity is the court’s establishment of personal jurisdiction. A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant only if the forum state provides a statutory basis for exercising jurisdiction over the nonresident and the exercise of jurisdiction satisfies the constitutional due process standard. Personal jurisdiction is one of the most commonly litigated issues today, due primarily to confusion over the constitutional standard.

Commentators and courts write extensively about the constitutional prerequisites for personal jurisdiction, but say little about state long-arm statutes. Perhaps this should …

Linking Rule 9(B) Pleading And The First-To-File Rule To Advance The Goals Of The False Claims Act, Karin Lee

Northwestern University Law Review

No abstract provided.

How Congress Should Fix Personal Jurisdiction, Stephen E. Sachs

Northwestern University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constraining Minnesota's Hip-Pocket Regime: Too Much Or Not Enough? (Or Both?) (Or Neither?), Joe Muchlinski

William Mitchell Law Review

No abstract provided.

Diverging Paths: The Minnesota Supreme Court’S Decision To Reject The “Plausibility” Pleading Standard In Walsh V. U.S. Bank, Michael Sheran

William Mitchell Law Review

No abstract provided.

From Commitment To Compliance: Enforceability Of Remedial Orders Of African Human Rights Bodies, Roger-Claude Liwanga

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

Over the last seven decades, there has been a global proliferation of international and regional human rights tribunals. But with no coercive power to enforce their judgments, these international tribunals rely either on the good faith of the State parties or on the political process for the implementation of their remedial orders. This nonjudicial approach to enforcement has showed its limits, as most State parties are noncompliant with international judgments to the detriment of human rights victims. This article recommends a new approach involving the judicialization of the post-adjudicative stage of international proceedings as an avenue to increase the enforceability …

“Touching The Concerns” Of Kiobel: Corporate Liability And Jurisdictional Remedies In Response To Kiobel Vs. Royal Dutch Petroleum, Chinyere Kimberly Ikegbunam

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

Amending Rape Shield Laws: Outdated Statutes Fail To Protect Victims On Social Media, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1087 (2015), Sydney Janzen

UIC Law Review

This Comment will first discuss the discoverability and admissibility of social media evidence in criminal and/or civil sexual assault cases. Section II(A) provides a broad overview of both federal and state rape shield laws, including the legislative policies behind their enactments, as well as the modern expansion of social media in the context of the legal system. Section II(B) will address the modern utility of social media in the context of the legal system. Section III first analyzes how courts look at discoverability and admissibility of social media evidence generally, and then focuses on sexual assault cases specifically. Further, Section …

Solving The Puzzle Of Transnational Class Actions, Kevin M. Clermont

Indiana Law Journal

How should a U.S. class action treat proposed foreign class members in a circumstance where any resulting judgment will likely not bind those absentees abroad? The Author responds to Zachary Clopton’s analysis of this puzzle, and introduces a counterproposal.

Linking Patent Reform And Civil Litigation Reform, Greg Reilly

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

Patent reform increasingly focuses on discovery. Discovery is perceived as disproportionately expensive and burdensome in patent cases. Excessive discovery is said to fuel so-called “patent trolls” and impose an unhealthy tax on innovation and competition. These supposedly exceptional problems have led to exceptional patent-only reform proposals, such as delaying most discovery for over a year and reversing the seventy-five-year-old allocation of discovery costs. Treating patent litigation as exceptional has a siloing effect. Patent reform debates ignore parallel debates over general civil litigation reform that raise the same arguments about disproportionately expensive and burdensome discovery and propose their own set of …

Does The Presumption Of Validity Matter? An Experimental Assessment, Jeremy W. Brock

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Proper Standard Of Review For Required Party Determinations Under Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 19, Brandon R. Coyle

Fordham Law Review

Rule 19 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, concerning the required joinder of parties, ensures that all parties with an interest in an action are joined in the litigation. At any time during the suit, a court may determine that an absent party has a specific interest that requires its presence in the dispute. When the court cannot join the absent party, however, the court must use Rule 19(b) to determine whether to continue the litigation without the absentee or dismiss the suit entirely. Despite the potentially drastic consequence of dismissal, federal courts of appeals cannot agree on the …

The Award Of E-Discovery Costs To The Prevailing Party: An Analog Solution In A Digital World, Steven Baicker-Mckee

Cleveland State Law Review

Against this backdrop of the spiraling cost and burden of the discovery process, an issue is percolating through the lower and intermediate courts—the recoverability of e-discovery expenses as a component of the costs awarded to the successful party under Rule 54(d). Two divergent approaches have emerged in the judicial opinions and in the limited scholarship addressing the application of Rule 54(d) to e-discovery costs. The first contingent contends that Rule 54(d) is only intended to reimburse the prevailing party for a small subset of the total costs that the party has incurred. These jurists and scholars reason that Congressional intent …

Deselecting Biased Juries, Scott W. Howe

Utah Law Review

Critics of peremptory-challenge systems commonly contend that they inevitably inflict “inequality harm” on many excused persons and should be abolished. Ironically, the Supreme Court fueled this argument with its decision in Batson v. Kentucky by raising and endorsing the inequality claim sua sponte and then purporting to solve it with an approach that preserved peremptories. This Article shows, however, that the central problem is something other than inequality harm to excused persons. The central problem is the harm to disadvantaged litigants when their opponents use peremptories to secure a one-sided jury. This problem can arise often—whenever a venire is slanted …

A Survey Of Illinois Code Of Civil Procedure Section 2-619(A), 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1009 (2015), Wm. Dennis Huber

UIC Law Review

The paper examines the requirements of each section of Illinois Code of Civil Procedure Section 2-619(a) in greater depth by examining appellate and Illinois Supreme Court rulings in cases brought under each section of 2-619(a). It also analyzes the standards of review appellate courts apply under each section of 2-619(a). Finally, because 619(a) motions require affidavits in support of the motion, it is also necessary to consider the nature and sufficiency of affidavits

Supplemental Standing For Severability, Erik R. Zimmerman

Northwestern University Law Review

The Supreme Court has recently insisted that plaintiffs must have standing for every claim that they raise. But this claim-specific approach to standing is at odds with established practice in several contexts, including rulings on the severability of statutes. Courts often permit plaintiffs to claim that statutory provisions should be invalidated pursuant to severability doctrine, without requiring that they have standing for those claims. This Article argues that existing practice for severability is a form of “supplemental standing.” Supplemental standing is analogous to supplemental jurisdiction. It allows a plaintiff with standing for one claim to raise related claims, even if …