Law Commons^™

Provincialism In United States Courts , Patrick M. Mcfadden

Cornell Law Review

No abstract provided.

History, Jurisdiction, And The Federal Courts: Changing Contexts, Selective Memories, And Limited Imagination, Judith Resnik

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Exorcising The Evil Of Forum-Shopping, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Most of the business of litigation comprises pretrial disputes. A common and important dispute is over where adjudication should take place. Civil litigators deal with nearly as many change-of-venue motions as trials. The battle over venue often constitutes the critical issue in a case.

The American way is to provide plaintiffs with a wide choice of venues for suit. But the American way has its drawbacks. To counter these drawbacks, an integral part of our court systems, and in particular the federal court system, is the scheme of transfer of venue "in the interest of justice." However, the leading evaluative …

Supplemental Jurisdiction Over Claims By Plaintiffs In Diversity Cases: Making Sense Of 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (B), Darren J. Gold

Michigan Law Review

This Note examines the language and legislative history of section 1367(b) and proposes a uniform test for determining the circumstances in which subsection (b) authorizes the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction. Part I of this Note explains the doctrines of pendent and ancillary jurisdiction and examines how the Supreme Court's decision in Finley v. United States called these doctrines into question. Part II examines the language and legislative history of section 1367 and concludes that the statute only prohibits the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction over claims by plaintiffs in diversity cases when doing so would permit plaintiffs to circumvent the complete …

The Case For Appellate Court Revision, Joseph F. Weis Jr.

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Rationing Justice on Appeal: The Problems of the U.S. Courts of Appeals by Thomas E. Baker

Introduction To Mercer Law Review Symposium On Federal Judicial Independence, L. Ralph Mecham

Mercer Law Review

No abstract provided.

Transfer And Choice Of Federal Law: The Appellate Model, Robert A. Ragazzo

Michigan Law Review

In light of recent developments, a reexamination of the position that transferee federal law applies regardless of the context is in order. This article argues that the consensus that existed prior to the Marcus article and the Korean Air Lines case, although not based upon the most thorough analysis, comprises the better view: transferee federal law should apply after permanent but not MDL transfers.

Legislatively Directed Judicial Activism: Some Reflections On The Meaning Of The Civil Justice Reform Act, Matthew R. Kipp, Paul B. Lewis

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

With the Civil Justice Reform Act (CJRA), Congress attempted to further a trend that the federal judiciary had undertaken largely on its own initiative. Sensing a critical need to address the mounting expense and delay of federal civil litigation, Congress, like the judiciary, sought to increase the degree of early and active involvement of judges in the adjudicatory process. The result of this mandate has been a further emphasis on the role of the judge as a case manager. As a necessary corollary, the liberty and self-determination of individual litigants-ideals that have historically been seen as philosophical cornerstones of the …

The Emerging Role Of The Quid Pro Quo Requirement In Public Corruption .Prosecutions Under The Hobbs Act, Peter D. Hardy

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note discusses the quid pro quo requirement under the Hobbs Act, a federal criminal statute which applies to bribery by public officials. The author first describes two recent decisions by the Supreme Court, McCormick v. United States and Evans v. United States, which established slightly different versions of a quid pro quo requirement in public corruption prosecutions under the Hobbs Act. The author then explains that the lower federal courts interpreting McCormick and Evans have molded the quid pro quo requirement so that a prosecutor must prove in all public corruption cases under the Hobbs Act that the …

Diluting Justice On Appeal?: An Examination Of The Use Of District Court Judges Sitting By Designation On The United States Courts Of Appeals, Richard B. Saphire, Michael E. Solimine

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

According to a number of studies and commentators, a serious caseload crisis faces the federal courts. With respect to the federal courts of appeals, some have called for drastic remedial measures. Until Congress responds, the courts of appeals have been forced to adopt a range of coping measures. In this article, Professors Saphire and Solimine examine one of these measures, the utilization of designated district court judges on appellate panels. After discussing the origins and extent of this practice, they identify a number of problems it raises. They argue that extensive and routine utilization of district judges on appellate panels …

Will The Federal Courts Of Appeals Perish If They Publish? Or Does The Declining Use Of Opinions To Explain And Justify Judicial Decisions Pose A Greater Threat?, Martha Dragich

Faculty Publications

This Article examines three of those practices: selective publication, summary disposition, and vacatur upon settlement.

Lessons From Reforming Inquisitorial Systems, William T. Pizzi

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Fault Is In Ourselves, Roger J. Miner '56

Bar Associations

No abstract provided.

Women In The Federal Judiciary: Three Way Pavers And The Exhilirating Change President Carter Wrought, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Laura W. Brill

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Head-Of-State Immunity In The United States Courts: Still Confused After All These Years, Shobha Varughese George

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Opinion: Federal Judges Misconstrue Rule 704 (Or Is That An Impermissible Legal Conclusion), Kathy Jo Cook

Cleveland State Law Review

This article addresses the need to formulate a uniform and predictable approach to the admissibility of expert opinion testimony which relates the law to the facts. First, it briefly discusses the history of expert opinion testimony. Second, it discusses, through a case analysis, the difficult, if not impossible task that courts have assumed in attempting to differentiate between two types of expert opinions: (1) those which are, by their nature, factual; and (2) those which require some level of legal analysis-directly relating the law to the facts of the case. Finally, this article suggests an alternative approach which is arguably …