Law Commons^™

Mdl For The People, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

By the terms of its own statute and the limits of its constitutional authority, multidistrict litigation (“MDL”) is designed to transfer and coordinate individual lawsuits then return plaintiffs back to their chosen fora for case-specific discovery and trial. Because each plaintiff is present and has her own lawyer, there is no need for the judge to police conflicts of interest or attorney loyalty as in the MDL’s kin, the class action.

But these assumptions do not match the empirical reality. Remand is rare. MDL judges resolve ninety-nine percent of the cases before them. And to some attorneys, the people of …

Data Versus More Data In Multidistrict Litigation, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

A reply to Lynn A. Baker & Andrew Bradt, Anecdotes in the Search for Truth About Multidistrict Litigation, 107 Cornell Law Review Online 249 (2023).

Perceptions of Justice in Multi-district Litigation: Voices from the Crowd presents the results of a study that no one wanted us to do—or help us to do. Professors Lynn Baker and Andrew Bradt would prefer to dismiss as “anecdote” our two-year effort to find and gain the trust of multi-district litigation (MDL) plaintiffs whose attorneys told them not to discuss their case with anyone, including us.

There are decades worth of procedural justice studies …

Perceptions Of Justice In Multidistrict Litigation: Voices From The Crowd, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch, Margaret S. Williams

Scholarly Works

With all eyes on criminal justice reform, multidistrict litigation (MDL) has quietly reshaped civil justice, undermining fundamental tenets of due process, procedural justice, attorney ethics, and tort law along the way. In 2020, the MDL caseload tripled that of the federal criminal caseload, one out of every two cases filed in federal civil court was an MDL case, and 97% of those were products liability like opioids, talc, and Roundup.

Ordinarily, civil procedure puts tort plaintiffs in the driver’s seat, allowing them to choose who and where to sue, and what claims to bring. Procedural justice tells courts to ensure …

Collected Wisdom On Selecting Leaders And Managing Mdls, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch, Stephen Bough

Scholarly Works

Today, nearly one out of every two new suits filed in federal civil court is part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL). Initially designed to organize antitrust cases against electrical equipment manufacturers, MDL’s adaptability and minimal requirements made it the preferred approach for coordinating pretrial process for all manner of cases, from securities, employment, intellectual property, and antitrust to sales practices, common disasters, and products liability. Yet, the simplicity of MDL’s technical requirements—that cases are pending in different districts and share a common factual question—belie the complexity of the proceedings themselves. Governed principally by insiders’ unwritten but longstanding norms, both newly-appointed …

No Motion Left Behind: Adjudicating Motions To Remand In Cases Snap Removed To Mdls, Millie Price

Georgia Law Review

Under the current wording of the federal removal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1441, defendants in some jurisdictions may remove a state action to federal court before an in-state defendant is served. These defendants are taking advantage of the forum defendant rule in 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2). This phenomenon has been coined “snap removals.” Three federal courts of appeals allow such removals, whereas many federal district courts say it is improper. The “home” district court might not be the end point for the case, though. Corporate defendants often ask for the case to be transferred to a pending Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) …

Considering The Therapeutic Consequences Of Recent Reforms To Civil Statutes Of Limitations For Child Sexual Abuse Claims, Emma Hetherington

Scholarly Works

In recent years, child sexual abuse has emerged as a major topic of news, documentaries, and Hollywood films. Public attention on child sexual abuse, including the Boston Globe's reporting on the sexual abuse of children by priests in the Catholic Church, sexual abuse of elite gymnasts, and the #MeToo movement, have brought increased attention to the issue, sparking calls for reform and access to justice. State legislatures across the country have answered these calls for reform by seeking to improve civil statutes of limitation in order to increase survivor access to justice. Between 2002 and 2020, forty-eight states and the …

Judicial Adjuncts In Multidistrict Litigation, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch, Margaret S. Williams

Scholarly Works

Peeking under the tent of our nation's largest and often most impactful cases reveals that judges often act like ringmasters: They delegate their authority to a wide array of magistrate judges, special masters, and settlement administrators. Some, like the American Bar Association, see this as a plus that promotes efficiency and cost savings. Critics, however, contend that delegating judicial power especially to private citizens, removes adjudication from public scrutiny, injects thorny ethical questions about ex parte communications, and risks cronyism and high costs. By constructing an original dataset of ninety-two multidistrict products liability proceedings centralized over fourteen years, we introduce …

Publicly Funded Objectors, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

On paper, class actions run like clockwork. But practice suggests the need for tune-ups: sometimes judges still approve settlements rife with red flags, and professional objectors may be more concerned with shaking down class counsel than with improving class members’ outcomes. The lack of data on the number of opt-outs, objectors, and claims rates fuels debates on both sides, for little is known about how well or poorly class members actually fare. This reveals a ubiquitous problem — information barriers confront judges, objectors, and even reformers. Rule 23’s answer is to empower objectors. At best, objectors are a partial fix. …

Promoting Executive Accountability Through Qui Tam Legislation, Randy Beck

Scholarly Works

For hundreds of years prior to ratification of the U.S. Constitution, Anglo-American legislatures used qui tam legislation to enforce legal constraints on government officials. A qui tam statute allows a private informer to collect a statutory fine for illegal conduct, even if the informer lacks the particularized injury normally required for Article III standing. This essay explores whether qui tam regulation should be revived as a means of ensuring executive branch legal accountability."

Holding Supporters Of Terrorism Accountable: The Exercise Of General Jurisdiction Over The Pa And Plo In A Post-Daimler Framework, Mark D. Christopher

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Law Of The Sea-Submerged Lands-A State Must Exercise Substantial, Continuous, And Recognized Authority To Establish A Body Of Water As A Historic Bay, Sarah Melissa Stebbins

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Proportional Fault In Maritime Collisions-Charting The New Course, Gustave R. Dubus Iii

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Repeat Players In Multidistrict Litigation: The Social Network, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch, Margaret S. Williams

Scholarly Works

As class certification wanes, plaintiffs’ lawyers resolve hundreds of thousands of individual lawsuits through aggregate settlements in multidistrict litigation. But without class actions, formal rules are scarce and judges rarely scrutinize the private agreements that result. Meanwhile, the same principal-agent concerns that plagued class-action attorneys linger. These circumstances are ripe for exploitation: few rules, little oversight, multi-million dollar common-benefit fees, and a push for settlement can tempt a cadre of repeat players to fill in the gaps in ways that further their own self-interest.

Although multidistrict litigation now comprises 36 percent of the entire federal civil caseload, legal scholars have …

Ebola, Experimental Medicine, Economics, And Ethics: An Evaluation Of International Disease Outbreak Law, Sara L. Dominey

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The United Nations Convention On The Recognition And Enforcement Of Foreign Arbitral Awards: The First Four Years, A. Jason Mirabito

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Equity In International Law: Its Growth And Development, S. K. Chattopadhyay

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Admiralty - Shipowners’ Limited Liability Act - A Shipowner Cannot Invoke The Act To Limit His Liability For Wreck Removal Expenses Since A Statutory Duty To Remove A Sunken Vessel Prevents Him From Being “Without Privity Or Knowledge,” A Condition Precedent To The Invocation Of The Act, Thomas C. Holcomb

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Book Review: International Licensing Agreements. Edited By Gótz M. Pollzien And Eugen Langen. Indianapolis And New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Co., 2d Ed. 1971. Pp. Xlvi, 593. $35.00., William M. Poole

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Sovereign Immunity - The State Department’S Decision To Recognize And Allow The Claim Of Sovereign Immunity Is Binding Upon The Courts And Is Not Subject To Review Under The Administrative Procedure Act, Robin B. Gray Jr., George P. Shingler

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Foreign Investment Protection And Icsid Arbitration, Charles Vuylsteke

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Strategies For Combating Patent Trolls, J. Jason Williams, Mark V. Campagna, Olivia E. Marbutt

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Admiralty - Jurisdiction - For Aviation Tort Claims To Be Brought In Admiralty, A Significant Relationship To Traditional Maritime Activity Must Be Shown, Grier Newlin

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

International Law - Justiciability - Appellants Have Standing To Seek Injunction Against United States Trade With Southern Rhodesia, But Their Suit States A Claim Incapable Of Judicial Resolution, George Shingler

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Environmental Law - Oil Pollution Control - In The Absence Of Federal Preemption And Any Fatal Conflict Between Statutory Schemes, A State May Constitutionally Exercise Its Police Power To Provide For Cleanup Of Oil Spillage And For Recoupment Of Costs Concurrently With The Federal Government, Mary E. Deal

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Standard Investment Agreement: Text And Comments, Philippe Kahn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Judicial Recusation In The Federal Republic Of Germany, Sigmund A. Cohn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Some Structural Dilemmas Of World Organization, C. Wilfred Jenks

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Function Of The International Court Of Justice In The World Community, Ernest A. Gross

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Standing For (And Up To) Separation Of Powers, Kent H. Barnett

Scholarly Works

The U.S. Constitution requires federal agencies to comply with separation-of-powers (or structural) safeguards, such as by obtaining valid appointments, exercising certain limited powers, and being sufficiently subject to the President’s control. Who can best protect these safeguards? A growing number of scholars call for allowing only the political branches — Congress and the President — to defend them. These scholars would limit or end judicial review because private judicial challenges are aberrant to justiciability doctrine and lead courts to meddle in minor matters that rarely effect regulatory outcomes.

This Article defends the right of private parties to assert justiciable structural …

Discouraging Frivolous Copyright Infringement Claims: Fee Shifting Under Rule 11 Or 28 U.S.C. § 1927 As An Alternative To Awarding Attorney's Fees Under Section 505 Of The Copyright Act, David E. Shipley

Scholarly Works

The United States Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons resolved a disagreement over when it is appropriate to award attorney’s fees to a prevailing defendant under section 505 of the Copyright Act, and ended a perceived venue advantage for losing plaintiffs in some jurisdictions. The Court ruled unanimously that courts are correct to give substantial weight to the question of whether the losing side had a reasonable case to fight, but that the objective reasonableness of that side’s position does not give rise to a presumption against fee shifting. It made clear that other factors …