Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Unwritten Norms Of Civil Procedure, Diego A. Zambrano
The Unwritten Norms Of Civil Procedure, Diego A. Zambrano
Northwestern University Law Review
The rules of civil procedure depend on norms and conventions that control their application. Civil procedure is a famously rule-based field centered on textual commands in the form of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP). There are over eighty rules, hundreds of local judge-made rules, due process doctrines, and statutory rules, too. But written rules are overrated. Deep down, proceduralists know that the application of written rules hinges on broader norms that animate them, expand or constrain them, and even empower judges to ignore them. Unlike the FRCP and related doctrines, these procedural norms are unwritten, sociological, flexible, and …
#Sowhitemale: Federal Civil Rulemaking, Brooke D. Coleman
#Sowhitemale: Federal Civil Rulemaking, Brooke D. Coleman
Northwestern University Law Review
116 out of 136. That is the number of white men who have served on the eighty-two-year-old committee responsible for creating and maintaining the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The tiny number of non-white, non-male committee members is disproportionate, even in the context of the white-male-dominated legal profession. If the rules were simply a technical set of instructions made by a neutral set of experts, then perhaps these numbers might not be as disturbing. But that is not the case. The Civil Rules embody normative judgments about the values that have primacy in our civil justice system, and the rule-makers—while …
Judicial Mistakes In Discovery, Diego A. Zambrano
Judicial Mistakes In Discovery, Diego A. Zambrano
Northwestern University Law Review
A recent wave of scholarship argues that judges often fail to comply with binding rules or precedent and sometimes apply overturned laws. Scholars have hypothesized that the cause of this “judicial noncompliance” may be flawed litigant briefing that introduces mistakes into judicial decisions—an idea this Essay calls the “Litigant Hypothesis.” The Essay presents a preliminary study aimed at exploring ways of testing the validity of the Litigant Hypothesis. Employing an empirical analysis that exploits recent amendments to Federal Discovery Rule 26, this Essay finds that the strongest predictor of noncompliance in a dataset of discovery decisions is indeed faulty briefs. …
Linking Rule 9(B) Pleading And The First-To-File Rule To Advance The Goals Of The False Claims Act, Karin Lee
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.