Law Commons^™

Notice Risk And Registered Agency, Andrew K. Jennings

Faculty Articles

To sue a firm is to sue an artificial person, making the most reliable service method—physically handing papers to the defendant—unusable. This problem illustrates notice risk: if a plaintiff’s service obligations are loose, it is advantaged (because the defendant may never receive notice), whereas if they are strict, the defendant is advantaged (because the plaintiff may struggle to effect service). For litigation involving corporate defendants, civil procedure and corporate law mitigate this problem through a technology for managing notice risk: registered agency. A firm using this technology, because it cannot be served directly, appoints an agent who will accept papers …

The Anti-Plaintiff Pending Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure And The Pro-Defendant Composition Of The Federal Rulemaking Committees, Patricia W. Moore

Faculty Articles

For decades, the Civil Rules Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee) has garnered passage of amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) that have incrementally narrowed discovery in the service of the Advisory Committee's stated effort to combat the alleged "cost and delay" of civil litigation. More of the same are on their way to Congress now. In the classical David-and-Goliath lawsuit brought by an individual person against an institutional defendant, these pending amendments hurt David and help Goliath more than any previous round of amendments to the FRCP. The individual versus institution case, not coincidentally, is the most common …

Using A Civil Suit To Punish/Deter Sponsors Of Terrorism: Connecting Arafat & The Plo To The Terror Attacks In The Second Intifada, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

Civil litigation has fantastic potential to punish acts of terror and to deter future acts. However, there exists a conundrum regarding the establishment of the factual connection between the regime that secretly sponsors or supports terror and the actual acts of terror. To hold a regime responsible for terrorism, accountability must be established.

The ongoing civil action of Sokolow v. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) perfectly illustrates this dilemma—on the one hand the offending regime disavows acts of terror while on the other hand it secretly supports and orchestrates terror. However, Yasser Arafat, President of the Palestinian National Assembly (PNA), …

Jewish Law Courts In America: Lessons Offered To Sharia Courts By The Beth Din Of America Precedent, Michael J. Broyde

Faculty Articles

Although the BDA is now a fifty-year-old organization, its true metamorphosis as an arbitration panel began only in 1996 when it gained autonomy from the Rabbinical Council of America. In the fifteen years since, an independent board of directors has worked with the BDA’s rabbinic leaders to craft an arbitration process that secular courts would feel comfortable upholding. While the BDA’s transformation required some level of compromise within Jewish law itself, the adaptations necessary for judicial acceptance proved to be procedural. Broadly, this meant conforming to the tenets of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). More specifically, the BDA’s viability came …

False Security: How Courts Have Improperly Rendered The Protections Of The Protective Order Illusory, Ramona L. Lampley

Faculty Articles

The protective order is perhaps one of the most useful and “taken for granted” discovery devices contemplated by the Colorado and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The purpose of a joint protective order in civil litigation is to permit the parties to produce business information without fear that the information will be disseminated publicly, and with a court order that the information be used only for purposes of the present litigation. Blanket protective orders serve the interests of a just, speedy, and less expensive determination of complex disputes by alleviating the need for and delay occasioned by extensive and repeated …

American Punitive Damages Vs. Compensatory Damages In Promoting Enforcement In Democratic Nations Of Civil Judgments To Deter State-Sponsors Of Terrorism, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

The primary consequence of the attacks on 9/11 on the U.S. was a fundamental legal shift in the approach that the U.S. has taken when confronting terrorism and the States that support them. The new challenge of the post 9/11 approach focused on ways to effectively combat not only terrorist organizations but also the States that sponsor them. This new thinking demands that Western democracies adopt an internationally based functional legal methodology that can deter rogue States from sponsoring terrorism.

Civil litigation against States that sponsor or support terrorism is a potential legal tool which could be used with great …