Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Removal Jurisdiction Over Mass Actions, Mallory A. Gitt
Removal Jurisdiction Over Mass Actions, Mallory A. Gitt
Washington Law Review
The mass action provision in the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 provides a federal forum for certain state court litigation that resembles class actions but otherwise could not be removed. The provision is triggered when state court plaintiffs propose a joint trial of common legal or factual issues. But defining what constitutes that triggering event has proved difficult for federal courts. They have not used a uniform framework to determine when they have subject matter jurisdiction over the purported mass action, and have lacked a common interpretation of the statutory language to begin the inquiry. That lack of coherence …
Revisiting Solving Jurisdiction's Social Cost: A Brief Rejoinder To Professor Klerman, Dustin E. Buehler
Revisiting Solving Jurisdiction's Social Cost: A Brief Rejoinder To Professor Klerman, Dustin E. Buehler
Washington Law Review Online
My recent article https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol89/iss3/2/">Solving Jurisdiction’s Social Cost examines issues implicated by nonwaivable federal court subject-matter jurisdiction. I argue that courts and commentators are prone to monistic theories of jurisdictional value, failing to consider the full range of interests implicated by jurisdictional rules. I then catalogue the various interests arising from jurisdictional rules. Lastly, I advance several solutions, including early jurisdictional certification orders, a cut-off point for jurisdictional challenges, interlocutory appeals of jurisdictional rulings, and sanctions to deter private-party abuse. Daniel Klerman’s response to my article is articulate, well-reasoned, and persuasive. Among other contentions, he suggests that mandatory jurisdictional …