Law Commons^™

Trial Practice And Procedure, Joseph M. Colwell, Christopher B. Mcdaniel

Mercer Law Review

This Article addresses selected opinions and legislation of interest to the Georgia civil trial practitioner issued during the Survey period of this publication.

Class Actions, Thomas M. Byrne, Stacey Mcgavin Mohr

Mercer Law Review

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit’s 2021 class-action work featured an important decision on the existence of an independent ascertainability requirement for class certification. In an abrupt reversal of two unpublished opinions acknowledging the existence of such a requirement, the court aligned itself with most circuits that have addressed the question in demoting the ascertainability of class membership to a factor to be considered in establishing the manageability of a class action, rather than an independent requirement. The court’s other significant cases concerned class settlements and standing.

It’S Time To Resolve The Circuit Split: Unconstitutional Actions By Federal Employees Should Not Fall Within The Scope Of The Discretionary Function Exception Of The Ftca, Laney Ivey

Mercer Law Review

The Federal Torts Claims Act (FTCA) is an avenue for United States citizens to sue the federal government for torts committed by government employees within the scope of their work. Congress designed the FTCA to allow citizens to overcome the doctrine of sovereign immunity, which allows citizens to recover from injuries suffered at the hands of government agents. Under the FTCA, there are exceptions where recovery is not allowed; the most prominent exception is known as the discretionary function exception, under which discretionary actions by government employees are immune from liability under the FTCA.

Trial Practice And Procedure, John O'Shea Sullivan, Leesa M. Guarnotta

Mercer Law Review

The 2021 Survey period yielded decisions involving issues of first impression relating to federal trial practice and procedure in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. This Article analyzes recent trial practice developments in the Eleventh Circuit, including significant rulings in the areas of consumer debt collections, removal, jurisdiction and abstention, arbitration, and sanctions.

Government Discretion Advised (Even If It’S Unconstitutional): How The Eleventh Circuit Has Expanded The United States’S Immunity From Tort Suits, John Rodriquez

Mercer Law Review

Mackie Shivers, a sixty-four-year-old man, was stabbed in the eye by his mentally-ill cellmate with a pair of scissors. Although the attack left Shivers permanently blind, he received no legal remedy to compensate him for his injuries. This result is due, at least in part, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit’s decision to interpret the discretionary function exception to the Federal Torts Claim Act (FTCA) in a broader way than virtually all of its sister circuits. The holding by the Eleventh Circuit in Shivers v. United States bars FTCA claims under the exception even for …

Creating A Civil Remedy In Georgia For Survivors Of Out-Of-State Childhood Sexual Abuse, Alexandra H. Bradley

Mercer Law Review

Sexual abuse casts long shadows and causes long-lasting effects on its survivors, particularly children. Especially tragic, most abused children are abused by an adult whom that child knows and trusts. This abuse by anyone, especially by a child’s parents or close family friend, often causes lifelong emotional damage. Survivors generally do not recognize the extent of their abuse until many years later.

This late onset or delayed discovery has made it difficult for courts to provide redress. Although technically children could sue their abuser when the abuse occurs, children generally do not know they have a cause of action, nor …

So Help Me, God, Decide This Case: The Eleventh Circuit’S New Standard For Dismissing Religious Jurors During Deliberations, Amanda Claxton

Mercer Law Review

You are on trial for a crime. Maybe you did precisely what the government claims, though perhaps not. However, a judge will not decide your fate because you exercised your constitutional right to a jury trial. During deliberations, you hear that a juror practices a religion condemning those who commit the crime you are accused of. You feel the juror would unfairly prejudice your chances of walking away freely. To your dismay, the judge refuses to dismiss the juror. You ask whether allowing this prejudicial juror to determine your fate is legal. After United States v. Brown, it is. …

No More “Heads Defendants Win, Tails Plaintiffs Lose”: How The Georgia Supreme Court’S Relation Back Decision In Cannon Rebalances Pleading Power, Jordan Lipp

Mercer Law Review

Imagine your daughter dying in a high-speed police chase—when she was not even the driver that evaded police or caused the crash. You want to hold someone accountable, but you do not know who the right person is if you sue: the deputy, the sheriff in his personal capacity, the sheriff in his official capacity, the county, the sheriff’s office, the county commissioners, the insurer of the police car? You sue the wrong one, and it is too late. Now what?

Thankfully for you, Georgia has forgiving pleading standards. Relation back is a legal fiction that assumes a claim was …

The Party Respectfully Requests A Jury Trial On All Issues So Triable: What Issues Are Triable To A Jury And What Issues Should Be Triable To A Jury? A Comment On The Right To A Jury Trial, With A Focus On Civil Trials, And When The Right Exists, Michael Downing

Mercer Law Review

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed . . . .” But what about civil prosecutions? What about prosecutions under state law, not federal? What does the universally expected “right to a jury trial” really mean or afford the parties to a trial?

Under federal law and the United States Constitution, by the time the Bill of Rights was drafted, the ideal of an accused’s right to a jury trial was already deeply rooted within …

Family Feuds And Circuit Splits: A Clash Between Corporate Cousins Causes The Eleventh Circuit To Revisit The “Long-Lost” Burford Abstention Doctrine, William Wheeler

Mercer Law Review

Corporate litigation is often a highly complex process. The rules and regulations surrounding shareholder demands, derivative lawsuits, review committees, and corporate dissolution create a convoluted procedural web that can be exceedingly difficult to untangle. Due to this complexity, federal court is an attractive choice for many civil litigants; federal forums have predictable and established rules of procedure and federal judges tend to have more time to give each case individualized consideration. These factors can accelerate and smooth the litigation process. However, throughout the last two decades, litigants in corporate dissolution actions have had no choice but to seek relief in …

The Objection Exception Is Overruled! The Georgia Supreme Court Makes A Course Correction By Reviving The Contemporaneous Objection Rule, Ryan Read

Mercer Law Review

What comes to mind when you think of evidence being presented at jury trials? Typically, both sides prevent evidence to the jury, and both sides fight hard to make sure no prejudicial evidence is allowed in that would bias the jury against their client. Both sides also work hard to prepare persuasive openings and closings to further affect the jury’s perception of their client, the opposition, and the evidence that has been presented. So, when an attorney on one side makes prejudicial statements about the opposing counsel’s client, one would naturally expect an objection to be made, right? Well, in …