Law Commons^™

Class Actions, Thomas M. Byrne, Stacey Mcgavin Mohr

Mercer Law Review

During 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit continued to address a familiar set of recurring issues in contemporary class action law, including the scope of jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), class action settlement controversies, and the impact of arbitration agreements on class actions.

Trial Practice And Procedure, John O'Shea Sullivan, Tala Amirfazli, Adelyn B. Boleman

Mercer Law Review

The 2017 survey period yielded noteworthy decisions relating to federal trial practice and procedure in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, several of which involved issues of first impression. This Article analyzes recent developments in the Eleventh Circuit, including significant rulings in the areas of civil procedure, statutory interpretation, and federal subject-matter jurisdiction.

Getting Schooled: The United States Court Of Appeals For The Eleventh Circuit Holds That The Federal Government Need Not Show "Good Cause" Before Settling And Dismissing A Pending Qui Tam Action Against College, Laura Leigh Fox

Mercer Law Review

In United States v. Everglades College, Inc., a case of first impression in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, the court interpreted the good cause intervention requirement of § 3730(c)(3) of Title 31 of the United States Code (U.S.C.). The court was asked to determine whether the United States needed to show "good cause" for intervening in a qui tam action brought by two private individuals under the False Claims Act (FCA). The government, after originally declining to proceed with the FCA action itself, eventually decided to "intervene" while the action was pending on the …

Redefining Roles And Duties Of The Transactional Lawyer: A Narrative Approach, Lori D. Johnson

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Article posits that narrative theory can assist the transactional lawyer in walking this tightrope effectively and ethically.

Specifically, this Article proceeds to show that the use of narrative techniques, specifically those proposed by Walter Fisher, can assist transactional lawyers: (1) in understanding their clients’ goals more fully; (2) in more effectively advancing their clients’ goals through persuasion; and (3) in creating complete, holistic documents to govern the proposed deal. As such, the appropriate use of narrative techniques and understanding of narrative theory can enhance the skills of transactional lawyers, and improve client outcomes.

This Article proceeds in three …

Rwu First Amendment Blog: David Logan's Blog: Discovering Trump 06-22-2018, David A. Logan

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

The Husky Case: Fraud, Bankruptcy, And Veil Piercing, Harvey Gelb

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

A recent Supreme Court decision, Husky International Electronics, Inc. v. Ritz, explores the meaning of the word “fraud” under a federal bankruptcy statutory section. That section uses the term “actual fraud,” and bears upon the question of whether a particular debt should be denied a discharge. The Court’s approach in defining fraud affords guidance to the question of defining fraud under other statutes. The Husky case also raised a veil piercing issue to be dealt with on remand. That issue involved the application of Texas statutory law precluding veil piercing in cases brought by contract creditors unless they were victims …

A Fork In The Road: Issues Surrounding The Legality Of Mandatory Class Action Waivers In Arbitration Agreements, Brielle Oshinsky

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

Recently, federal circuit courts have presented contrasting outcomes regarding the legality of mandatory class action waivers in arbitration agreements. More specifically, these outcomes vary on whether such waivers violate the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), and importantly, whether it is possible for these statutes to coexist with the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The Second, Fifth, and Eighth Circuits have previously held that the act of an employer requiring employees to sign class action waivers in arbitration agreements posed no violation to either the FLSA or the NLRA. However, in May 2016, the Seventh …

Shareholder Litigation And Corporate Disclosure: Evidence From Derivative Lawsuits, Thomas Bourveau, Yun Lou, Rencheng Wang

Research Collection School Of Accountancy

Using the staggered adoption of universal demand (UD) laws in the United States, we study the effect of shareholder litigation risk on corporate disclosure. We find that disclosure significantly increases after UD laws make it more difficult to file derivative lawsuits. Specifically, firms issue more earnings forecasts and voluntary 8-K filings, and increase the length of management discussion and analysis (MD&A) in their 10-K filings. We further assess the direct and indirect channels through which UD laws affect firms' disclosure policies. We find that the effect of UD laws on corporate disclosure is driven by firms facing relatively higher ex …

Malice Maintenance Is “Runnin’ Wild”: A Demand For Disclosure Of Third-Party Litigation Funding, Anusheh Khoshsima

Brooklyn Law Review

Third-party funding (TPLF) is when a nonparty, who does not have a direct stake in the litigation, funds a lawsuit. There are varying motivations that drive TPLF arrangements—including investors offering loans to receive a portion of the settlement or public interest groups sponsoring impact litigation. This note discusses a specific mode of TPLF that is motivated by a personal interest in the lawsuit rather than monetary gain, referred to as “malice maintenance.” At common law, maintenance was prohibited to prevent powerful and wealthy individuals form taking advantage of the court system. The majority of states today, however, permit at least …

Letter To The Hon. Sen. Orrt (Nys Senate) Regarding Litigation Finance (Lawsuit Lending) (2018), Maya Steinitz

Faculty Scholarship

Following testimony to the New York State Senate's Standing Committee on Consumer Protection (available on SSRN and YouTube), Professor Steinitz was asked to elaborate on her recommendation for a statutory minimum recovery requirement to protect consumers of litigation financing. Enclosed is her response to this inquiry.

Litigating Trauma As Disability In American Schools, Taylor N. Mullaney

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

No abstract provided.

“Nationwide” Injunctions Are Really “Universal” Injunctions And They Are Never Appropriate, Howard Wasserman

Howard M Wasserman

Federal district courts are routinely issuing broad injunctions prohibiting the federal government from enforcing constitutionally invalid laws, regulations, and policies on immigration and immigration-adjacent issues. Styled “nationwide injunctions,” they prohibit enforcement of the challenges laws not only against the named plaintiffs, but against all people and entities everywhere.

The first problem with these injunctions is one of nomenclature. “Nationwide” suggests something about the “where” of the injunction, the geographic scope in which it protects. The better term is “universal injunction,” which captures the real controversy over the “who” of the injunction, as courts purport to protect the universe of all …

When Should Force Directed Against A Police Officer Be Justified Under The Maine Criminal Code? - Toward A Coherent Theory Of Law Enforcement Under The Code's Justification Provision, F. Todd Lowell

Maine Law Review

In State v. Clisham, the Law Court unanimously found that section 104(1) of the Maine Criminal Code operated to justify the use of non-deadly force by a private citizen seeking to prevent an illegal search of his house by police officers. This Comment will focus on the justification provisions of the Maine Criminal Code as they relate to law enforcement practices and will examine how the Law Court's most recent decision interpreting one of the provisions affects that relationship. This Comment will argue that the policy underlying the justification provisions mandates that the justification defense be denied to persons responding …

Aggregation On Defendants' Terms: Bristol-Myers Squibb And The Federalization Of Mass-Tort Litigation, Andrew D. Bradt, D. Theodore Rave

Andrew D. Bradt

Although it is destined for the personal jurisdiction canon, the Supreme Court’s eight-to-one decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court does little to clarify that notoriously hazy doctrine. It does, however, significantly alter the balance of power in complex litigation. Bristol-Myers is a landmark case because it makes both mass-tort class actions and mass joinders impracticable in almost any state court outside of the defendant’s home states. With federal courts already hostile to class actions, plaintiffs who want to aggregate their claims will have to do so on the defendant’s terms: either on the defendant’s home turf or in …

Confronting Silence: The Constitution, Deaf Criminal Defendants, And The Right To Interpretation During Trial, Deirdre M. Smith

Maine Law Review

For most deaf people, interactions with the hearing community in the absence of interpretation or technological assistance consist of communications that are, at most, only partly comprehensible. Criminal proceedings, with the defendant's liberty interest directly at stake, are occasions in which the need for deaf people to have a full understanding of what is said and done around them is most urgent. Ironically, the legal “right to interpretation” has not been clearly defined in either statutory or case law. Although the federal and state constitutions do not provide a separate or lesser set of rights for deaf defendants, their situation …

How Meyer V. Uber Could Demonstrate That Uber And The Sharing Economy Fit Into Antitrust Law, Nicholas Andrew Passaro

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

Recently, Uber driver (and former Uber CEO) Travis Kalanick has been sued under antitrust laws. The plaintiffs argue that Mr. Kalanick and the other Uber drivers have engaged in a price fixing arrangement that violates §1 of the Sherman Act. The case, Meyer v. Uber (originally Meyer v. Kalanick), is still being litigated. This Comment will analyze each side’s potential arguments and will ultimately conclude that the court should find Uber drivers not guilty of a Sherman Act violation. This determination will be based on: the merits of the various arguments, how such a holding would fit within the …

Clarifying The “Probate Lending” Debate: A Response To Professors Horton And Chandrasekher, Jeremy Kidd Ph.D.

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

The debate over third-party funding of legal claims just got more interesting. The debate already had plot twists, such as free-market scholars lining up in opposition to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and alongside proplaintiff scholars who they oppose in tort reform debates. Now add to the mix a recent paper by Professors Horton and Chandrasekher that introduced an entirely new angle to the debate: funding of probate disputes. Now that this parallel area of funding has been identified, comparing and contrasting probate funding with litigation funding should illuminate the incentives that funders/recipients face in both scenarios. By pointing out …

A (Thigh) Gap In The Law: Addressing Egregious Digital Manipulation Of Celebrity Images, Jessica L. Williams-Vickery

Georgia State University Law Review

In 2012, world-renowned supermodel Coco Rocha agreed to be photographed for the cover of one of Elle’s magazine publications, Elle Brazil. Rocha posed for the pictures in a dress with significant cutouts, covered only by a sheer layer of skin-toned fabric. In keeping with her firm policy of no full or partial nudity, Rocha wore a bodysuit underneath the dress to limit her exposure. When Elle published the magazine, the final product shocked Rocha; the magazine had altered the image to remove her bodysuit, giving the impression Rocha had shown more skin than she in fact had. Rocha took to …

United States V. Osman: Including Future Therapy Costs In Mandatory Restitution Awards Is The Growing Trend Among Circuits, But Is It Wise?, Mary Theresa Mahfoud

Mercer Law Review

Mandatory restitution awards for child victims of sex crimes and child pornography now include future therapy costs. This trend, while theoretically increasing the amount of restitution awarded to the victim, can have unintended harmful consequences. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in United States v. Osman, as a matter of first impression, upheld a restitution order under the Mandatory Restitution for Sexual Exploitation of Children Act (Mandatory Restitution Act) to include future therapy expenses.

William Edward Osman pleaded guilty in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida to the possession, production, …

Testimony On Third Party Financing Of Lawsuits, Maya Steinitz

Faculty Scholarship

In this written testimony, Professor Steinitz addresses bills pending in the New York State Senate and Assembly relating to consumer litigation finance. Among other things, she suggests (1) establishing a “Minimum Payment” for plaintiffs, instead of (or in addition to) flat rates or interest caps; and (2) defining the scope of application by applying an “Unsophisticated Plaintiff” test rather than by focusing on the financing amount. She also addresses other matters implicated by the bills such as whether lawyers should be permitted to provide financial advice, prohibition of prepayment penalties, registration requirements, and right of rescission in the context of …

China's Anti-Corruption Crackdown And The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, Daniel C.K. Chow

Texas A&M Law Review

China’s highly publicized crackdown on corruption may affect the type and number of cases in China that arise under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”), but it should not be assumed that the crackdown will necessarily lead to fewer FCPA prosecutions. Although there is some overlap of the goals of China’s corruption crackdown and the goals of the FCPA, China’s crackdown also serves important goals of the ruling Communist Party. The main goal of the current crackdown is to reinforce the Party’s power by targeting enemies and rivals of the current leadership. The crackdown is not aimed at prohibiting bribes …

When Courts Run Amuck: A Book Review Of Unequal: How America's Courts Undermine Discrimination Law By Sandra F. Sperino And Suja A. Thomas (Oxford 2017), Theresa M. Beiner

Texas A&M Law Review

In Unequal: How America’s Courts Undermine Discrimination Law (“Unequal”), law professors Sandra F. Sperino and Suja A. Thomas provide a point-by-point analysis of how the federal courts’ interpretations of federal anti-discrimination laws have undermined their efficacy to provide relief to workers whose employers have allegedly engaged in discrimination. The cases’ results are consistently pro-employer, even while the Supreme Court of the United States—a court not known for being particularly pro-plaintiff—has occasionally ruled in favor of plaintiff employees. The authors suggest some reasons for this apparent anti-plaintiff bias among the federal courts, although they do not settle on a particular reason …

Suing For Spanish: Puerto Ricans, Bilingual Voting, And Legal Activism In The 1970s, Ariel Arnau

Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects

This dissertation examines how the legal activism of a Puerto Rican group of activist-lawyers and community members contributed to the reshaping of voting law and language policy during the 1970s. The Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF) coordinated a series of lawsuits in Chicago, New York City, and Philadelphia during the early 1970s. The decisions in these lawsuits provided the legal framework to rewrite federal voting rights law during the Voting Rights Act (VRA) reauthorization hearings in 1975. These cases resulted in vastly expanded opportunity to vote for all language minorities in the United States. These civil rights …

Take This Job And Shove It: The Pragmatic Philosophy Of Johnny Paycheck And A Prayer For Strict Liability In Appalachia, Eugene "Trey" Moore Iii

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming

Life After Daubert V. Merrell Dow: Maine As A Case Law Laboratory For Evidence Rule 702 Without Frye, Leigh Stephens Mccarthy

Maine Law Review

In reaching its recent decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the United States Supreme Court grappled not with case law but with fundamental questions about the nature of science and its role in law. The court in Daubert addressed the problematic issue of admissibility of expert scientific testimony. In the end the Court rejected as an exclusionary rule the venerable standard set in 1923 by Frye v. United States. Frye held that scientific testimony was to be excluded unless it had gained “general acceptance” in its field. Daubert held that Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence …

Litigation Academy Helps Lawyers Hone Skills 4-30-2018, Katie Mulvaney, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Asarco Llc V. Atlantic Richfield Company, Ryan L. Hickey

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabiltiy Act, commonly known as CERCLA, facilitates cleanup of hazardous waste sites and those contaminated by other harmful substances by empowering the Environmental Protection Agency to identify responsible parties and require them to undertake or fund remediation. Because pollution sometimes occurrs over long periods of time by multiple parties, CERCLA also enables polluters to seek financial contribution from other contaminators of a particular site. The Ninth Circuit clarified the particuar circumstances under which contribution actions may arise in Asarco LLC v. Atlantic Richfield Co., holding non-CERCLA settlements may give rise to CERCLA contribution …

Controlling The Jury-Teaching Function, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

When evidence with a scientific basis is offered, two fundamental questions arise. First, should it be admitted? Second, if so, how should it be assessed? There are numerous participants who might play a role in deciding these questions—the jury (on the second question only), the parties (through counsel), expert witnesses on each side, the trial court, the forces controlling the judicial system (which include, but are not limited to, the appellate courts), and the scientific establishment. In this Article, I will suggest that together, the last two—the forces controlling the judicial system and the scientific establishment—have a large role to …

Climate Change Litigation And Narrative: How To Use Litigation To Tell Compelling Climate Stories, Grace Nosek

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

Basic Trial Advocacy, Michael W. Mullane

Maine Law Review

Mary Crates taught me to “begin as you mean to go on.” Peter Murray's book is a good place to begin for those embarking on a life of trial advocacy. For those of us whose beginnings are distant and often painful memories, it is an excellent reminder of where we meant to go. Trial advocacy is an infinitely complex task. This simple fact is both its joy and curse. Teaching trial advocacy is equally difficult. There is no “never” and no “always.” There is a host of commonly accepted maxims, many of which are contradictory on their face and all …