Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Jurisdiction (11)
- Practice and Procedure (6)
- CPLR (2)
- Civil procedure (2)
- Declaratory judgment act (2)
-
- Federal question (2)
- New York (2)
- Personal jurisdiction (2)
- CPLR 302(a)(1) (1)
- Citizen suits (1)
- Diversity jurisdiction (1)
- Environmental Law (1)
- FRCP (1)
- Federal question jurisdiction (1)
- Fraudulent joinder (1)
- General jurisdiction (1)
- International shoe (1)
- Joinder (1)
- Judicial power (1)
- Licci (1)
- Long arm statute (1)
- Long-arm (1)
- Long-arm jurisdiction (1)
- Minimum contacts (1)
- New york (1)
- Original jurisdiction (1)
- Paterno v. Laser Spine Institute (1)
- Second circuit (1)
- Transaction of business (1)
Articles 1 - 13 of 13
Full-Text Articles in Law
Hogan Vs. Gawker Ii: A Statutory Solution To Fraudulent Joinder, Michelle S. Simon
Hogan Vs. Gawker Ii: A Statutory Solution To Fraudulent Joinder, Michelle S. Simon
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This Article will first review the intersection of federal jurisdiction and litigation strategy by examining the requirements for diversity jurisdiction in federal court as well as the circumstances that must be present to allow a defendant to remove a case from state court to federal court. The Article will then review the history of the court-created doctrine of fraudulent joinder, and will examine the various tests currently in use by the lower federal courts. The Article will then address whether it makes more sense to create a statutory solution, and will examine and analyze the Fraudulent Joinder Prevention Act of …
Paterno V. Laser Spine Institute: Did The New York Court Of Appeals' Misapplication Of Unjustified Policy Fears Lead To A Miscarriage Of Justice And The Creation Of Inadequate Precedent For The Proper Use Of The Empire State’S Long-Arm Statute?, Jay C. Carlisle, Christine M. Murphy, Kiersten M. Schramek, Marley Strauss
Paterno V. Laser Spine Institute: Did The New York Court Of Appeals' Misapplication Of Unjustified Policy Fears Lead To A Miscarriage Of Justice And The Creation Of Inadequate Precedent For The Proper Use Of The Empire State’S Long-Arm Statute?, Jay C. Carlisle, Christine M. Murphy, Kiersten M. Schramek, Marley Strauss
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This article discusses CPLR section 302(a)(1) as applied by the New York State Court of Appeals in Paterno v. Laser Spine Institute. The Paterno Court failed to properly apply a statutory jurisdictional analysis by conflating it with a due process inquiry. Also, the Court unnecessarily balanced the interests of the Empire State's citizens in having a forum for access to justice with unjustified policy fears of potential costs to the state from assertions of in personam jurisdiction. Furthermore, the Court's policy focus4 on the protection of medical doctors from lawsuits and the prevention of “floodgate” litigation which would adversely affect …
Resoling International Shoe, Donald L. Doernberg
Resoling International Shoe, Donald L. Doernberg
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
Goodyear Dunlop Tire Operations, S.A. v. Brown and Daimler AG v. Bauman sharply restricted general jurisdiction over corporations, limiting it to a corporation’s (1) state of incorporation, (2) state of principal place of business, or (3) another state where the corporation is “essentially at home.” The Court analogized the first two categories to an individual’s domicile. The Court made clear that the third category is very small, leading Justice Sotomayor, in her opinion concurring in the judgment, to charge that the Court had made many corporations “too big for general jurisdiction.” It is noteworthy that although the Court used the …
Seeking Justice In The Empire State: Court Of Appeals Broadens The Reach Of Long Arm Jurisdiction And Clarifies The Statutory Guidelines For Application Of Cplr Section 302(A)(1), Jay C. Carlisle
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This article will discuss developments in long-arm jurisdiction under CPLR section 302(a)(1)1 and analyze the recent New York State Court of Appeals‘s thoughtful and instructive decision in Licci ex rel. Licci v. Lebanese Canadian Bank, SAL. Licci decided the question of whether a non-domiciliary‘s maintenance of a bank account in New York constituted a “transaction of business” out of which the plaintiff‘s claims arose under the state‘s long-arm statute. The Licci plaintiffs had alleged that the defendant funded a terrorist organization responsible for the injuries and deaths of certain plaintiffs and decedents they represented. The Licci opinion did not decide …
Recent Jurisdiction Developments In The New York Court Of Appeals, Jay C. Carlisle
Recent Jurisdiction Developments In The New York Court Of Appeals, Jay C. Carlisle
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This article will discuss recent developments in long-arm jurisdiction under CPLR section 302 and two related New York Court of Appeals decisions. Specifically, the article will address Fischbarg v. Doucet, which presents the court's expansive view of long-arm jurisdiction in light of recent technological developments, and Ehrenfeld v. Mahfouz, in which the court's decision to limit long-arm jurisdiction was rejected by subsequent legislation, signaling a more expansive application of CPLR 302 in the future.
Is Citizen Suit Notice Jurisdictional And Why Does It Matter?, Karl S. Coplan
Is Citizen Suit Notice Jurisdictional And Why Does It Matter?, Karl S. Coplan
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
The question of whether notice is jurisdictional or not has important ramifications for citizen suit litigation. The characterization of the notice requirement as “jurisdictional” implicates the proper procedure for raising notice objections, the means of curing notice defects, the question of waiver of notice objections, and the timing of raising notice objections. This article will conduct a brief review of the case law concerning the jurisdictional nature (or not) of the notice requirement, a consideration of the as-yet unnoticed impact of Steel Co. on the issue, and a discussion of the procedural and litigation ramifications of characterizing the notice element …
Second Circuit 2000-2001 Personal Jurisdiction Developments, Jay C. Carlisle
Second Circuit 2000-2001 Personal Jurisdiction Developments, Jay C. Carlisle
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This Survey Article will review some of the district and circuit courts' significant decisions, and comment on future trends for application of the law of personal jurisdiction in the Second Circuit. The Article concludes with a recommendation that district court judges should not grant or deny personal jurisdiction defenses until at least limited jurisdictional discovery has been granted and is completed.
What's Wrong With This Picture?: Rule Interpleader, The Anti-Injunction Act, In Personam Jurisdiction, And M.C. Escher, Donald L. Doernberg
What's Wrong With This Picture?: Rule Interpleader, The Anti-Injunction Act, In Personam Jurisdiction, And M.C. Escher, Donald L. Doernberg
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
The effectiveness of interpleader depends upon the availability of injunctions against other proceedings. There is no congressional authorization of such injunctions for rule interpleader cases. If interpleader were an in rem action, one of the other exceptions to the Anti-Injunction Act might save the day, but the Supreme Court has apparently foreclosed that option. This article examines that three-sided conflict. Part II discusses the problem in greater depth, focusing first on how interpleader functions and why it depends on being “the only game in town.” Part II next addresses the background and interpretation of the Anti-Injunction Act, exploring particularly the …
"You Can Lead A Horse To Water . . .": The Supreme Court's Refusal To Allow The Exercise Of Original Jurisdiction Conferred By Congress, Donald L. Doernberg
"You Can Lead A Horse To Water . . .": The Supreme Court's Refusal To Allow The Exercise Of Original Jurisdiction Conferred By Congress, Donald L. Doernberg
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This Article will address primarily the lack of textual and historical support for the Court's narrow construction of jurisdictional provisions that cause it to deny the existence of jurisdiction. In addition, the Article will briefly describe the lack of historical support for the Court's independent development of the abstention doctrines and their consequent illegitimacy. Both areas share democratic theory and institutional legitimacy concerns that Professor Redish will address, but let me respectfully suggest that these issues are best understood in light of the congressional thought underlying the Title 28 authorizations.
The Trojan Horse: How The Declaratory Judgment Act Created A Cause Of Action And Expanded Federal Jurisdiction While The Supreme Court Wasn't Looking, Donald L. Doernberg, Michael B. Mushlin
The Trojan Horse: How The Declaratory Judgment Act Created A Cause Of Action And Expanded Federal Jurisdiction While The Supreme Court Wasn't Looking, Donald L. Doernberg, Michael B. Mushlin
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This Article examines the Court's treatment of declaratory judgment actions. It demonstrates that the Court's ‘procedural only’ view of the Act frustrates congressional intent and is neither analytically sound nor practical. Part I discusses the general rules governing federal question jurisdiction and the Court's method for dealing with declaratory judgment cases. Part II explores the history and purpose of the Declaratory Judgment Act and its relationship to federal question jurisdiction. This study demonstrates that the Supreme Court's assumptions about the jurisdictional import of the Declaratory Judgment Act find no support in the legislative history. Further, it shows that the Court's …
History Comes Calling: Dean Griswold Offers New Evidence About The Jurisdictional Debate Surrounding The Enactment Of The Declaratory Judgment Act, Donald L. Doernberg, Michael B. Mushlin
History Comes Calling: Dean Griswold Offers New Evidence About The Jurisdictional Debate Surrounding The Enactment Of The Declaratory Judgment Act, Donald L. Doernberg, Michael B. Mushlin
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
In a recent article, we proposed that the Declaratory Judgment Act of 1934 was intended, contrary to the Supreme Court's long-standing interpretation, to enlarge the subject matter jurisdiction of the federal courts. When Congress considered the Act, jurisdictional concerns centered around whether declaratory judgments would violate the case-or-controversy clause, not whether introduction of the device would expand the federal question jurisdiction Congress already had authorized. There is, indeed, substantial evidence that Congress intended to expand federal question jurisdiction to include at least two, and possibly three, case models; there is virtually no evidence supporting the contrary position taken by the …
There's No Reason For It; It's Just Our Policy: The Well-Pleaded Complaint Rule Sabotages The Purposes Of Federal Question Jurisdiction, Donald L. Doernberg
There's No Reason For It; It's Just Our Policy: The Well-Pleaded Complaint Rule Sabotages The Purposes Of Federal Question Jurisdiction, Donald L. Doernberg
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This Article is presented in three parts. Section I traces the statutory and case development of federal question jurisdiction, both under the constitutional and statutory “arising under”' language. Section II demonstrates the problems that the Mottley rule has caused in building a rational system of federal question jurisdiction, particularly in cases seeking declaratory judgments. Section III contends that the Mottley rule is irrational because it is a mechanical rule that ignores important policy considerations underlying the existence of federal question jurisdiction. Section III goes on to suggest that federal question jurisdiction should depend upon the centrality of the federal issue …
Personal Jurisdiction In Federal Question Suits: Toward A Unified And Rational Theory For Personal Jurisdiction Over Non-Domiciliary And Alien Defendants, Irene D. Johnson
Personal Jurisdiction In Federal Question Suits: Toward A Unified And Rational Theory For Personal Jurisdiction Over Non-Domiciliary And Alien Defendants, Irene D. Johnson
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
No coherent or cohesive procedure or theory has emerged either in regard to the entire question of personal jurisdiction in federal courts or in regard to federal question cases. The cases and courts are in disarray, both as to when a federal standard should apply to the question of amenability to service of process and as to what a federal standard might require. The purpose of this article is to examine the problem in the context of the various types of cases in which it might arise and to prescribe some consistent, sensible scheme of personal jurisdiction in federal question …