Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Class action (2)
- Multidistrict litigation (2)
- Transferee judges (2)
- 1407 (1)
- AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion (1)
-
- Aggregation (1)
- Arbitration (1)
- BP Fund (1)
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics (1)
- Camreta v. Greene (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Civil recourse (1)
- Complex litigation (1)
- Constitutional rights (1)
- Constitutional tort (1)
- Costa Concordia (1)
- Deepwater Horizon (1)
- Inc. v. Dukes (1)
- MDL (1)
- Mass tort litigation (1)
- Mass torts (1)
- Multi-district litigation (1)
- Non-Article IIII courts (1)
- Official immunity (1)
- Pearson v. Callahan (1)
- Qualified immunity (1)
- Remand (1)
- Resolution (1)
- Tort law (1)
- Transfer (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Constitutional Remedies: Reconciling Official Immunity With The Vindication Of Rights, Michael Wells
Constitutional Remedies: Reconciling Official Immunity With The Vindication Of Rights, Michael Wells
Scholarly Works
A great deal of scholarly attention is devoted to constitutional rights and comparatively little to remedies for their violation. Yet rights without remedies are not worth much, and remedial law does not always facilitate the enforcement of rights, even of constitutional rights. This Article discusses an especially challenging remedial context: suits seeking damages for constitutional wrongs that occurred in the past, that are unlikely to recur, and hence that cannot be remedied by forward-looking injunctive or declaratory relief. Typical fact patterns include charges that the police, prison guards, school administrators, or other officials have engaged in illegal searches and seizures, …
Remanding Multidistrict Litigation, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch
Remanding Multidistrict Litigation, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch
Scholarly Works
Multidistrict litigation has frequently been described as a “black hole” because transfer is typically a one-way ticket. The numbers lend truth to this proposition. As of 2010, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation remanded only 3.425% of cases to their original districts. That number dwindled to 3.1% in 2012, and to a scant 2.9% in 2013. Retaining cases in hopes of forcing a global settlement can cause a constellation of complications. These concerns range from procedural justice issues over selecting a forum and correcting error, to substantive concerns about fidelity to state laws, to undermining democratic participation ideals fulfilled through …
Disaggregative Mechanisms: The New Frontier Of Mass-Claims Resolution Without Class Actions, Jaime Dodge
Disaggregative Mechanisms: The New Frontier Of Mass-Claims Resolution Without Class Actions, Jaime Dodge
Scholarly Works
Aggregation has long been viewed as the primary if not sole vehicle for mass claims resolution. For a half-century, scholars have consistently viewed the consolidated litigation of similar claims through joinder, class actions and more recently multi-district litigation as the only mechanism for efficiently resolving mass claims. In this Article, I challenge that long-standing and fundamental conception. The Article seeks to reconceptualize our understanding of mass claims resolution, arguing that we are witnessing the birth of a second, unexplored branch of mass claims resolution mechanisms — which I term “disaggregative” dispute resolution systems because they lack the traditional aggregation of …
Facilitative Judging: Organizational Design In Mass-Multidistrict Litigation, Jaime Dodge
Facilitative Judging: Organizational Design In Mass-Multidistrict Litigation, Jaime Dodge
Scholarly Works
Faced with the emerging phenomenon of complex litigation—from school desegregation to mass torts—the judiciary of the last century departed from the traditional, purely adjudicative role in favor of managerial judging, in which they actively supervised cases and even became involved in settlement talks. I argue that a similar transition in judicial role is now occurring. I contend that transferee judges are now stepping back from active participation in settlement discussions but playing a far greater role in structuring and administering the litigation. This new judicial role focuses on facilitating the parties’ resolution of the case, whether through settlement or remand …