Law Commons^™

The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Potential Insurance Coverage Implications, Lynn K. Neuner, W. Nicholson Price

Articles

More than 300 lawsuits have already been filed in Louisiana, Florida, Texas, Mississippi, and Alabama against BP and other corporations involved in the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, including Transocean, Halliburton, and Cameron, with thousands more anticipated. This article briefly addresses the contours of the coverage lawsuit already filed against BP and other coverage disputes we may see in the future.

The Missing Minority Judges, Pat K. Chew, Luke T. Kelley-Chew

Articles

This essay documents the lack of Asian-American judges and considers the consequences.

Optimizing Private Antitrust Enforcement, Daniel A. Crane

Articles

Private litigation is the predominant means of antitrust enforcement in the United States. Other jurisdictions around the world are increasingly implementing private enforcement models. Private enforcement is usually justified on either compensation or deterrence grounds. While the choice between these two goals matters, private litigation is not very effective at advancing either one. Compensation fails because the true economic victims of most antitrust violations are usually downstream consumers who are too numerous and remote to locate and compensate. Deterrence is ineffective because the time lag between the planning of the violation and the legal judgment day is usually so long …

Does Monopoly Broth Make Bad Soup?, Daniel A. Crane

Articles

There is an oft-repeated maxim in U.S. antitrust law that a monopolist's conduct must be examined in its totality in order to determine its legality. Judges admonish that plaintiffs "should be given the full benefit of their proof without tightly compartmentalizating the various factual components and wiping the slate clean after scrutiny of each." As the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit stated in much-quoted language, "It is the mix of various ingredients ... in a monopoly broth that produces the unsavory flavor."' In this article, I examine the use and misuse of monopoly broth theories. Reflecting a …

Against Secret Regulation: Why And How We Should End The Practical Obscurity Of Injunctions And Consent Decrees (Symposium: Rising Stars: A New Generation Of Scholars Looks At Civil Justice), Margo Schlanger

Articles

Every year, federal and state courts put in place orders that regulate the prospective operations of certainly hundreds and probably thousands of large government and private enterprises. Injunctions and injunction-like settlement agreements-whether styled consent decrees, settlements, conditional dismissals, or some other more creative title-bind the activities of employers, polluters, competitors, lenders, creditors, property holders, schools, housing authorities, police departments, jails, prisons, nursing homes, and many others. The types of law underlying these cases multiply just as readily: consumer lending, environmental, employment, anti-discrimination, education, constitutional, and so on. Injunctive orders, whether reached by litigation or on consent, suffuse the regulatory environment, …

Did We Avoid Historical Failures Of Antitrust Enforcement During The 2008-2009 Financial Crisis?, Daniel A. Crane

Articles

During both economic crises and wars, times of severe national anxiety, antitrust has taken a back seat to other political and regulatory objectives. Antitrust enforcement has often been a political luxury good, consumed only during periods of relative peace and prosperity. In 1890, the Sherman Act's adoption kicked off the era of national antitrust enforcement. Barely three years later, the panic of 1893 provided the first major test to the national appetite for antitrust enforcement. Perhaps 1893 should not be included in the story: antitrust was still young, and it was not even clear that the Sherman Act applied to …

Corporate Law In The Shanghai People's Courts, 1992-2008: Judicial Autonomy In A Contemporary Authoritarian State, Nicholas C. Howson

Articles

In late 2005 China adopted a largely rewritten Company Law that radically increased the role of courts. This study, based on a review of more than 1000 Company Law-related disputes reported between 1992 and 2008 and extensive interactions with PRC officials and sitting judges, evaluates how the Shanghai People's Court system has fared over 15 years in corporate law adjudication. Although the Shanghai People's Courts show generally increasing technical competence and even intimations of political independence, their path toward institutional autonomy is inconsistent. Through 2006, the Shanghai Court system demonstrated significantly increased autonomy. After 2006 and enactment of the new …

Opening Statement: Persuading Without Argument, Maureen A. Howard

Articles

A basic rule of trial practice is that a lawyer cannot argue in opening statement. A lawyer who breaks this rule runs the risk of drawing an objection from opposing counsel and having it sustained by the judge. Of course, as with most rules of trial practice, a lawyer can get away with de minimus violations in most cases and wholesale disregard in cases where opposing counsel—whether as a result of inexperience, inattention or trial strategy—doesn’t object. Although simple in concept, lawyers commonly falter in practical application of the “no argument” rule in two ways: 1) failing to understand what …

Mastering Foolproof Witness Control On Cross-Examination, Maureen A. Howard

Articles

In the wonderfully entertaining and instructive video, The Ten Commandments of Cross-Examination, the late Irving Younger offered this appraisal of lawyers’ ability to conduct cross-exam: “Most lawyers do it badly all the time, no lawyer does it well all the time, and no lawyer in the early stages of his career does it well at all.” Happily, we’ve come a long way since Younger’s grim 1975 assessment, due to the instruction of maestros like Younger, Terrence McCarthy (McCarthy on Cross-Examination), and Larry Pozner and Roger Dodd (Cross-Examination: Science and Techniques). All too often, however, lawyers …

Closing Argument: Connecting The Dots For The Jury, Maureen A. Howard

Articles

A common error made by unseasoned attorneys when giving closing argument is retelling the “story” of their case. Storytelling is best used in opening statement, not closing argument. By the time the jurors hear closing argument, they are well acquainted with the story, because they have heard two opening statements and all the evidence.

Closing argument, as the name suggests, is instead the time to argue. This means that in addition to revisiting the theme(s) presented in opening statement, a lawyer may use rhetorical questions, draw conclusions and inferences from the evidence, discuss the credibility of the witness, examine the …

Liar! Liar! Impeaching A Witness On Cross-Examination, Maureen A. Howard

Articles

There are certain trial moments that can set an advocate’s heart a-flutter. One is the opportunity to show the jury that an adverse witness is not to be trusted. Even better is the chance to expose the witness to be a bald-faced liar.

Welcome to the wonderful world of impeachment. Impeachment is the art of discrediting the witness on cross-examination. There are seven impeachment techniques:

• Bias, interest, and motive

• Contradictory facts

• Prior convictions — FRE 609

• Prior bad acts — FRE 608 (b)

• Prior inconsistent statements — FRE 613

• Bad character for truthfulness — …

Direct Examination: Lawyer As Director, Maureen A. Howard

Articles

A trial lawyer presenting her case in chief through direct examination is somewhat like a film director: the lawyer thoroughly analyzes the case and develops a plan for the most effective way to present the case to the jury to best advance her theme and theory. Just as no script would play out on film the exact same way in the hands of different directors, no case would be presented in exactly the same way by different trial lawyers. Yet there are constants to be found in the steps effective trial lawyers take during their case in chief when presenting …

Playing Nice: The Dos And Don'ts Of Courtroom Etiquette, Maureen A. Howard

Articles

No matter how brilliant the lawyer, impressive her credentials, thorough her case preparation, or razor-sharp her analytic skills, she risks damaging her case — and her reputation — if she fails to comply with basic courtroom etiquette. There are certain dos and don’ts of courtroom behavior that are understood by seasoned trial lawyers and expected from judges. There are also common courtesies expected by jurors of lawyers who are viewed as professional and credible. A lawyer will undoubtedly learn these behavioral norms in the trenches over time, but she is well advised to have a courtroom etiquette checklist in her …

Securities Class Actions Move North: A Doctrinal And Empirical Analysis Of Securities Class Actions In Canada, Adam C. Pritchard, Janis P. Sarra

Articles

The article explores securities class actions involving Canadian issuers since the provinces added secondary market class action provisions to their securities legislation. It examines the development of civil liability provisions, and class proceedings legislation and their effect on one another. Through analyses of the substance and framework of the statutory provisions, the article presents an empirical and comparative examination of cases involving Canadian issuers in both Canada and the United States. In addition, it explores how both the availability and pricing of director and officer insurance have been affected by the potential for secondary market class action liability. The article …