Law Commons^™

A $53m Settlement That Will Improve Conditions In Ny Prisons And Jails, Alexander A. Reinert

Cardozo News 2023

This article appeared in the 2023 edition of Cardozo Life magazine.

Professor Alexander Reinert has seen his work bring about major changes in prison and jail conditions in New York City and New York State many times. In April 2023, he was co-counsel with lawyers of Cuti Hecker Wang LLP in a historic settlement in Miller v. City of New York, which involved detainees held in restrictive isolation at two jails on Rikers Island and one unit at what was then the Manhattan Detention Complex.

Civil Rights Clinic Wins Historic Louisiana Case Ending Solitary Confinement Of Individuals Awaiting Death Sentences, Betsy Ginsberg, Cardozo Civil Rights Clinic

Cardozo News 2023

This article appeared in the 2023 edition of Cardozo Life magazine.

Should an incarcerated person who has been sentenced to death be required to live out the rest of his or her life in solitary confinement? Not according to the Cardozo Civil Rights Clinic, which recently won a historic settlement changing policy in Louisiana prisons.

Shielded Book Launch, Cardozo Center For Rights And Justice

Event Invitations 2023

Professor Alexander Reinert, Director of the Center for Rights and Justice, will moderate a discussion on Shielded: How the Police Became Untouchable. He will be joined by the author, Joanna Schwartz, Professor of Law at the University of California, Los Angeles. Schwartz is one of the country's leading scholars on policing.

In Shielded, Schwartz explores how the legal system protects the police from being held accountable, with insightful analyses about subjects ranging from qualified immunity to no-knock warrants. By weaving true stories of people seeking restitution for violated rights, cutting across race, gender, criminal history, tax bracket, and …

Asymmetric Review Of Qualified Immunity Appeals, Alexander A. Reinert

Articles

This article presents results from the most comprehensive study to date of the resolution of qualified immunity in the federal courts of appeals and the US Supreme Court. By analyzing more than 4000 appellate decisions issued between 2004 and 2015, this study provides novel insights into how courts of appeals resolve arguments for qualified immunity. Moreover, by conducting an unprecedented analysis of certiorari practice, this study reveals how the US Supreme Court has exercised its discretionary jurisdiction in the area of qualified immunity. The data presented here have significant implications for civil rights enforcement and the uniformity of federal law. …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Maureen Carroll, Christine Bartholomew, Andrew Bradt, Brooke Coleman, Robin Effron, Myriam Gilles, Robert Klonoff, Suzette Malveaux, David Marcus, Elizabeth Porter, D. Theodore Rave, Elizabeth Schneider, And Adam Zimmerman In Support Of Defendants-Appellees/Cross Appellants, Myriam E. Gilles

Amicus Briefs

Amici are law professors with expertise in the requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Amici have written extensively about class action litigation, including the use of class actions in civil rights cases seeking declaratory or injunctive relief. Together, we share an interest in ensuring that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure continue to be construed so as to ensure the “just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.” FED. R. CIV. P. 1.

Brief Of Complex Litigation Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Myriam E. Gilles

Amicus Briefs

The amici are law professors who teach and write in the field of federal civil procedure and complex litigation. Amici share an interest in presenting this Court with an impartial view on the function of the class action and its relationship to the law of Article III justiciability to inform the question presented in this case.

Brief For Plaintiff-Appellant, Alexander A. Reinert

Amicus Briefs

Plaintiff-Appellant Devin Darby ("Plaintiff' or "Darby") brought this action pro se in the District Court, after experiencing several months of excruciating pain while in the care and custody of Appellees-Defendants David Greenman, Rafael Hamilton, and John Doe Nos. 1 and 2 ("Defendants"). Although Plaintiff clearly pleaded the grounds establishing that Defendants violated the constitution by failing to provide treatment for Mr. Darby's painful and swollen gums, the District Court dismissed the action. The District Court entered its dismissal even though no arguments were presented on behalf of Defendant Hamilton and John Doe Nos. 1 and 2. Indeed, at the time …

The Narrative Of Costs, The Cost Of Narrative, Alexander A. Reinert

Articles

In Judge Victor Marrero’s Article “The Cost of Rules, the Rule of Costs,” he argues that too many lawyers use too many procedural devices to cause too much inefficiency within our civil justice system. His Article helpfully asks us to focus on the role of the lawyer and law firm economics in assessing how to solve waste and abuse in civil litigation. He proposes an array of procedural changes to address these perceived problems. In this response, I argue that Judge Marrero’s assertions about costs are questionable, given relevant empirical evidence. Moreover, although I am confident that there are instances …

The Second Circuit And Social Justice, Matthew Diller, Alexander A. Reinert

Articles

The Second Circuit is renowned for its landmark rulings in fields such as white collar crime and securities law — bread and butter issues growing out of Wall Street’s preeminence in the financial landscape of the nation. At the same time, the Second Circuit has a long tradition of breaking new ground on issues of social justice. Unlike some circuit courts which have reputations in the area of social justice built around one or two fields, such as the Fifth Circuit’s pioneering role in civil rights litigation or the Ninth Circuit’s focus on immigration, there is no one area of …

Measuring The Impact Of Plausibility Pleading, Alexander A. Reinert

Articles

Ashcroft v. Iqbal and its predecessor, Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, introduced a change to federal pleading standards that had remained essentially static for five decades. Both decisions have occupied the attention of academics, jurists, and practitioners since their announcement. Iqbal alone has, as of this writing, been cited by more than 95,000 judicial opinions, more than 1,400 law review articles, and innumerable briefs and motions. Many scholars have criticized Iqbal and Twombly for altering the meaning of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure outside the traditional procedures contemplated by the Rules Enabling Act. Almost all commentators agree that …

The Supreme Court's Civil Assault On Civil Procedure, Alexander A. Reinert

Articles

No abstract provided.

Class Dismissed: Contemporary Judicial Hostility To Small-Claims Consumer Class Actions, Myriam E. Gilles

Articles

I start from the view that small-value consumer claims are a primary reason that class actions exist, and that without class actions many - if not most - of the wrongs perpetrated upon small-claims consumers would not be capable of redress. It would then seem to follow that the class action device should be readily available in small-claims consumer cases. And yet, over the past decade, federal district courts have repeatedly declined to certify class actions on grounds that are specific to small-claims consumer cases. Foremost among those grounds is the notion that the federal class action rule carries within …

The Good, The Bad, And The Frivolous Case: An Essay On Probability And Rule 11, Charles M. Yablon

Articles

This essay begins by asking why lawyers bring frivolous cases, cases which, under the standard definitions of frivolousness, have no chance of success and should never have been brought. Rejecting the usual answers of lawyer stupidity and greed, it offers a different view of the frivolous case --that most of the cases that have been challenged and sanctioned in recent years under Rule 11 were brought by lawyers bringing cases they reasonably believed had a low (but not zero) probability of success. This provides a more plausible explanation for wy lawyers persist in bringing such cases, since they are essentially …

Stupid Lawyer Tricks: An Essay On Discovery Abuse, Charles M. Yablon

Articles

No abstract provided.