Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (110)
- University of Richmond (32)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (27)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (22)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (20)
-
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (20)
- William & Mary Law School (18)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (13)
- Selected Works (10)
- The University of Akron (9)
- University of Colorado Law School (8)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (8)
- Cleveland State University (7)
- University of Kentucky (7)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (6)
- University of Washington School of Law (6)
- St. John's University School of Law (5)
- Fordham Law School (4)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (4)
- University of Baltimore Law (4)
- Campbell University School of Law (3)
- Pepperdine University (3)
- Seattle University School of Law (3)
- St. Mary's University (3)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (3)
- University of Georgia School of Law (3)
- Case Western Reserve University School of Law (2)
- Emory University School of Law (2)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (2)
- University of San Diego (2)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (63)
- All Faculty Scholarship (22)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (22)
- Villanova Law Review (22)
- Indiana Law Journal (20)
-
- Articles (19)
- Law Faculty Publications (19)
- Faculty Publications (18)
- Nevada Law Journal (17)
- University of Richmond Law Review (11)
- Akron Law Review (9)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (9)
- Publications (8)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (6)
- Cleveland State Law Review (6)
- Kentucky Law Journal (5)
- Oklahoma Law Review (5)
- Scholarly Works (5)
- Sean Farhang (5)
- Washington Law Review (5)
- Faculty Scholarship (4)
- Northwestern University Law Review (4)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (4)
- William & Mary Law Review (4)
- Campbell Law Review (3)
- Faculty Articles (3)
- Pepperdine Law Review (3)
- Richmond Journal of Law & Technology (3)
- Seattle University Law Review (3)
- Catholic University Law Review (2)
- Publication Type
Articles 361 - 386 of 386
Full-Text Articles in Law
Compulsory Joinder Of Parties In Civil Actions, John W. Reed
Compulsory Joinder Of Parties In Civil Actions, John W. Reed
Articles
The plaintiff in a civil cause ordinarily is permitted to select the persons with whom he will litigate. The initial designation of parties to an action is made by the plaintiff, and if he chooses to sue B and not A,' that is ordinarily of no concern to B or to A or to the court. So also where the plaintiff without A as co-plaintiff sues B. Not always, however, is the plaintiff permitted unfettered choice in naming the parties to his lawsuit. On the one hand there are persons whose relationship to the situation in litigation is outside the …
Federal Procedure - Jurisdiction - Appeal From Judgment On Some Of Several Multiple Claims Under Rule 54(B), Lawrence N. Ravick S.Ed.
Federal Procedure - Jurisdiction - Appeal From Judgment On Some Of Several Multiple Claims Under Rule 54(B), Lawrence N. Ravick S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff filed a complaint in a federal district court alleging in six counts that defendant was engaged in unfair competition against business ventures carried on by the plaintiff. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. The court ordered two counts to be stricken, found that there was no just reason for delaying the final determination of the issues raised by these counts, and directed that judgment be entered thereon against the plaintiff. The plaintiff appealed and the defendant moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the order and judgment appealed from was not a final or …
Suits Against Unincorporated Associations Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, John Kaplan
Suits Against Unincorporated Associations Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, John Kaplan
Michigan Law Review
Concepts, Benjamin Cardozo has said, "are useful, indeed indispensable, if kept within their place. We will press them quite a distance. . . . A time comes, however, when the concepts carry us too far, or farther than we are ready to go with them, and behold, some other concept, with capacity to serve our needs is waiting at the gate. 'It is a peculiar virtue of our system of law that the process of inclusion and exclusion, so often employed in developing a rule, is not allowed to end with its enunciation, and that an expression in an opinion …
Adequacy Of Instructions To The Jury: Ii, Curtis Wright Jr.
Adequacy Of Instructions To The Jury: Ii, Curtis Wright Jr.
Michigan Law Review
The six states in this group present some very special cases. They range from an original colony to Florida and Texas, which were admitted to statehood in 1845. National rank in population varies from sixth (Texas) to twenty-sixth (Mississippi) with the average almost within the top one-third. As to increase of population, the mean is close to the national figure of fifteen percent. That statement needs qualification, however, since Florida increased 46 percent and Texas 20 percent, whereas Mississippi had an actual loss of two percent. No docket delay of more than six months is found anywhere except in Texas, …
Adequacy Of Instructions To The Jury: I, Curtis Wright, Jr
Adequacy Of Instructions To The Jury: I, Curtis Wright, Jr
Michigan Law Review
In view of frequent judicial complaints about "instructions by the acre," it may be appropriate to begin with a short justification for an article bearing a title which might appear to suggest an antithetical problem, that is, the existence of a question as to the adequacy of instructions to the jury. To this end one might repeat the assertion that the verdict of a jury which is not instructed as to the fundamental law of the case is "crackerbarrel justice." If this is true, it certainly is also true that the mere number of instructions given is no guarantee of …
Federal Procedure - Realignment Of Parties In Non-Diversity Case, David D. Dowd, Jr S.Ed.
Federal Procedure - Realignment Of Parties In Non-Diversity Case, David D. Dowd, Jr S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff (S1), a surety for the subcontractor, brought an action against the subcontractor and the prime contractor to compel them to set off their respective counterclaims in order to diminish the liability of S1. The subcontractor had another surety (S2) on a different obligation arising out of the same construction job, and the prime contractor, uncertain where liability should be placed, impleaded S2. On S1's motion to vacate the impleader order, held, denied, and the court on its own motion directed realignment of the parties, ruling that the main issue was division of …
Federal Procedure - Juries - Attacking Release For Fraud In Action At Law, James W. Beatty S.Ed.
Federal Procedure - Juries - Attacking Release For Fraud In Action At Law, James W. Beatty S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff brought an action to recover damages for personal injuries. Defendant filed an answer and asserted that plaintiff had executed a release in full for all claims against the defendant. In his reply plaintiff admitted that he had executed the release, but claimed that it was obtained by fraud on the part of the defendant. The district court granted defendant's motion to deny a jury trial on the ground that the matter of determining the validity of a release was properly cognizable in equity and that therefore plaintiff was not entitled to a jury trial on this issue. On appeal …
Amendments To The Federal Rules: The Function Of A Continuing Rules Committee, Charles A. Wright
Amendments To The Federal Rules: The Function Of A Continuing Rules Committee, Charles A. Wright
Vanderbilt Law Review
No development in American procedural history in the last century has exceeded in importance the adoption by the United States Supreme Court in 1938 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. These rules, the product of a distinguished Advisory Committee, introduced a system and a philosophy differing as markedly from the code pleading then in vogue as code pleading, in its day, had differed from common-law pleading. This new system has worked well in the federal courts, so well indeed as to stimulate a reexamination of procedure in many of the states, with nearly a dozen jurisdiction shaving already adopted …
Federal Procedure - Counterclaim To A Counterclaim Under The Federal Rules, Elizabeth Gaspar Brown
Federal Procedure - Counterclaim To A Counterclaim Under The Federal Rules, Elizabeth Gaspar Brown
Michigan Law Review
With one exception the cases decided in the federal courts under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have held that the plaintiff is free to plead a counterclaim in the reply, although in every instance the counterclaim in the reply under consideration was one related to the subject matter of the counterclaim pleaded in the defendant's answer.
Rule 43(A) And The Communication Privileged Understate Law: An Analysis Of Confusion, George W. Pugh
Rule 43(A) And The Communication Privileged Understate Law: An Analysis Of Confusion, George W. Pugh
Vanderbilt Law Review
What rules govern the admissibility of evidence in federal court? Rule 43 (a) purports to provide the answer with respect to cases falling within the ambit of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.' Is the Rule working satisfactorily, or should it now be abandoned in favor of a new and different solution? The problem thus presented is broad and pervasive. A definitive answer will not be attempted in this paper. Instead, the writer proposes to give only a general discussion of the broader aspects of the Rule, and to limit analysis of the cases to a very restricted area--the meaning …
Corporations - Shareholders - Right To Bring Derivative Action For Treble Damages Under Antitrust Laws, William K. Davenport S.Ed.
Corporations - Shareholders - Right To Bring Derivative Action For Treble Damages Under Antitrust Laws, William K. Davenport S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff, owner of 50 percent of the stock in a theater corporation, brought a derivative action in federal court for treble damages for loss of profits allegedly suffered from defendant's violation of the antitrust laws. The district court sustained defendant's motion to dismiss. On appeal to the court of appeals, held, reversed and remanded. Under the new federal rules, a stockholder may bring a derivative action for treble damages under the antitrust laws. Fanchon & Marco, Inc. v. Paramount Pictures, Inc., (2d Cir. 1953) 202 F. (2d) 731.
Summary Judgment Under The Federal Rules When An Issue Of Fact Is Presented, Mac Asbill, Willis B. Snell
Summary Judgment Under The Federal Rules When An Issue Of Fact Is Presented, Mac Asbill, Willis B. Snell
Michigan Law Review
Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure introduced to federal practice the summary judgment procedure, which had been developed previously in England and several of the states. The scope of rule 56 is the broadest possible, since the rule provides that any party may move for a summary judgment in any type of civil action. Rule 56(c) provides that the court shall grant a motion for summary judgment "if the pleadings, depositions, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving …
Civil Procedure-Joinder Of Causes Of Action In Michigan, J. David Voss
Civil Procedure-Joinder Of Causes Of Action In Michigan, J. David Voss
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiffs were the owners of several lots, and used their respective properties as residences. Defendants, manufacturers of cement and concrete products, operated several large trucks in their business. Plaintiffs filed a declaration to recover damages for injuries to their properties sustained as a result of the loud noises, vibrations, and cement dust caused by the defendants' trucks when using an alley leading to defendants' place of business. The defendants' motion for dismissal on grounds of misjoinder of parties and causes of action was overruled. On appeal, held, reversed. Owners of property are not entitled to be joined in one …
Federal Procedure-Jurisdiction-Determination Of Amount In Controversy In Class Actions Under Federal Rule 23, James W. Callison
Federal Procedure-Jurisdiction-Determination Of Amount In Controversy In Class Actions Under Federal Rule 23, James W. Callison
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff owned 50 shares of common stock valued at $950. She brought an action in behalf of herself and all other stockholders to enjoin a sale of unissued stock by the corporation to its president, claiming a violation of her preemptive right. The district court ruled on the merits. On appeal, held, the plaintiff's interest was but a small fraction of the $3,000 required to invoke the jurisdiction of the federal courts. Although the action was representative, the claims of other stockholders in a like situation could not be cumulated. Ames v. Mengel Co., (2d Cir. 1951) 190 …
The Federal Jurisdictional Amount Requirement And Joinder Of Parties Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Federal Procedure-Joinder Of Legal And Equitable Claims-Trial By Jury, William O. Allen
Federal Procedure-Joinder Of Legal And Equitable Claims-Trial By Jury, William O. Allen
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff brought an action against his employer in a federal district court under the Federal Employers' Liability Act for damages for personal injuries suffered during the course of his employment. In the same action, plaintiff sought to have a release, which he had executed, set aside on the ground that it had been obtained by defendant's fraud. Plaintiff requested a jury trial of both claims; defendant objected to a jury trial of the issue of setting aside the release, on the ground that a claim for cancellation of a release is for equitable relief triable to the court alone. Held …
Federal Courts-Use Of A Cross-Claim Under Rule 13(G) Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Rex Eames S.Ed.
Federal Courts-Use Of A Cross-Claim Under Rule 13(G) Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Rex Eames S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Under an ordinary automobile insurance policy, P insurance company promised to defend and indemnify Harvey for any suit arising from an accident involving his use of the insured truck. Collier sued Harvey in a state court alleging injuries due to the negligent use of the insured truck by two Harvey employees. Before judgment thereon, P, incorporated under the laws of Wisconsin, sued Harvey and Collier, citizens of Oklahoma, in the federal court. P sought a declaratory judgment on the grounds that (a) at the time of the accident the employees were under the control and supervision of the City …
Pleading And Practice-Failure To Answer Request For Admission Of Facts As Basis For Judgment On The Pleadings-Form Of Request For Admission Of Facts, Robert H. Frick
Pleading And Practice-Failure To Answer Request For Admission Of Facts As Basis For Judgment On The Pleadings-Form Of Request For Admission Of Facts, Robert H. Frick
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff filed a complaint for money owing for goods sold and delivered. Defendant filed a cross-complaint. Plaintiff filed an affirmative reply setting forth defenses to the cross-complaint, and three days later served defendant with a request that he "admit each and every allegation and averment contained in paragraphs I, II, III and IV of the plaintiff's affirmative reply to the cross-complaint of the defendants herein is true.'' Defendant failed to answer the request. Washington Rule of Practice 21 provides that such failure shall be deemed an admission of the facts submitted. The trial court granted plaintiff's motion for judgment on …
The Amendments To Rule 12 Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, John A. Bauman
The Amendments To Rule 12 Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, John A. Bauman
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
States' Rights And Federal Procedure, Bernard C. Gavit
States' Rights And Federal Procedure, Bernard C. Gavit
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Federal Courts-Rules Of Civil Procedure-Construction Of Rule 50 (B), Daniel W. Reddin, Ii
Federal Courts-Rules Of Civil Procedure-Construction Of Rule 50 (B), Daniel W. Reddin, Ii
Michigan Law Review
This action was brought in a South Carolina state court and removed to the federal district court on grounds of diversity of citizenship. After the evidence of both parties had been presented, the court denied defendant's motion for a directed verdict. Thereafter, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff. Although defendant filed a motion for a new trial on grounds of newly discovered evidence which the court denied, he did not move to have the verdict and judgment set aside and to have judgment entered in his favor as he might have done under Rule 50 (b) of the …
Amending The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Armistead M. Dobie
Amending The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Armistead M. Dobie
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
The New Federal Rules And State Procedure, Bernard C. Gavit
The New Federal Rules And State Procedure, Bernard C. Gavit
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
The New Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure [Part 2], Elwood Hutcheson
The New Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure [Part 2], Elwood Hutcheson
Washington Law Review
Continuing with Depositions and Discovery.
Survey Of The New Federal Rules: The New Practice In The Federal Courts In Civil Cases Cognizable At Law Or In Equity, Alfred J. Schweppe
Survey Of The New Federal Rules: The New Practice In The Federal Courts In Civil Cases Cognizable At Law Or In Equity, Alfred J. Schweppe
Washington Law Review
A new era in federal practice, in suits of a civil nature whether cognizable as cases at law or in equity, has been ushered in by the act of Congress of June 19, 19341. Acting under the authority of this statute the Supreme Court of the United States, with the aid of a distinguished advisory committee, undertook the preparation of a "unified system of general rules for cases in equity and actions at law in the District Courts of the United States and in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, so as to secure one form of civil …
Report Of The Committee On Federal Rules, Charles S. Albert
Report Of The Committee On Federal Rules, Charles S. Albert
Washington Law Review
Since the report on the November, 1937, draft of the Federal Rules was written, the Supreme Court, through the Attorney General, submitted to Congress on January 3, 1938, that draft with two important changes advocated by the Washington State Bar Association.