Law Commons^™

The Challenge Of Convincing Ethical Prosecutors That Their Profession Has A Brady Problem, Adam M. Gershowitz

Faculty Publications

In recent decades, both the media and legal scholars have documented the widespread problem of prosecutors failing to disclose favorable evidence to the defense – so called Brady violations. Despite all of this documentation however, many ethical prosecutors reject the notion that the criminal justice system has a Brady problem. These prosecutors – ethical lawyers who themselves have not been accused of misconduct – believe that the scope of the Brady problem is exaggerated. Why do ethical prosecutors downplay the evidence that some of their colleagues have committed serious errors?

This essay, in honor of Professor Bennett Gershman, points to …

Busting Up The Pretrial Industry, Andrew S. Pollis

Faculty Publications

It is by now axiomatic that the objective of the civil lawsuit has evolved. Litigants no longer routinely resolve their disputes through trial but instead engage in pretrial battles designed to extract favorable settlements. Modern litigation revolves around protracted discovery and dispositive motions, driven by two primary dynamics: (1) the maximization of fees for lawyers who charge their clients by the hour; and (2) the desire to make litigation as painful as possible for an adversary so that settlement becomes the adversary’s better option. We have, in short, fostered a pretrial industry that can relegate the merits of a dispute …

Trying The Trial, Andrew S. Pollis

Faculty Publications

Lawyers routinely make strategic advocacy choices that reflect directly, if inferentially, on the credibility of their clients’ claims and defenses. But courts have historically been reluctant to admit evidence of litigation conduct, sometimes even expressing hostility at the very notion of doing so. This Article deconstructs that reluctance. It argues not only that litigation conduct has probative value, but also that there is social utility in subjecting lawyer behavior to juror scrutiny.

Symposium On The Challenges Of Electronic Evidence, Daniel J. Capra, Sidney A. Fitzwater, Peter Pitegoff, Jeffrey S. Sutton, Paul Grimm, John Haried, Richard W. Vorder Bruegge, Jeffrey Bellin, Paul Scechtman, Deirdre M. Smith, Shira A. Scheindlin, David Shonka, Daniel Gelb, Andrew Goldsmith, George Paul, Paul Lippe

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Good Pretrial Lawyering: Planning To Get To Yes Sooner, Cheaper, And Better, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

Although the ostensible purpose for pretrial litigation is to prepare for trial, such preparation is inextricably intertwined with negotiation because the expected trial outcome is a major factor affecting negotiation. Indeed, since most litigated cases are settled, good litigators prepare for negotiation at least as much as trial. The lawyers interviewed for this article, who were selected because of their good reputations, described how they prepare for both possibilities. They recommend taking charge of their cases from the outset, which includes getting a clear understanding of clients and their interests, developing good relationships with counterpart lawyers, carefully investigating the cases, …

Discovery Under 28 U.S.C. §1782: Distinguishing International Commercial Arbitration And International Investment Arbitration, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

For many years, courts, commentators and counsel agreed that 28 U.S.C. §1782 – a somewhat extraordinary procedural device that allows U.S. courts to order discovery in the United States “for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal” – did not apply to disputes involving international arbitration. However, that presumption has come under challenge in recent years, particularly in the realm of investment arbitration, where the Chevron-Ecuador dispute has made Section 1782 requests a commonplace procedure. This Article takes a rigorous look at both the history and the future of Section 1782 in international arbitration, taking care to …

Navigating The Borders Between International Commercial Arbitration And U.S. Federal Courts: A Jurisprudential Gps, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

This article provides just that sort of guide, outlining the various ways in which U.S. federal courts can become involved in international commercial arbitration and introducing both basic and advanced concepts in a straightforward, practical manner. However, this article provides more than just an overview. Instead, it discusses relevant issues on a motion-by-motion basis, helping readers find immediate answers to their questions while also getting a picture of the field as a whole. Written especially for busy lawyers, this article gives practitioners, arbitrators and new and infrequent participants in international commercial arbitration a concise but comprehensive understanding of the unique …

Border Skirmishes: The Intersection Between Litigation And International Commercial Arbitration, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

This essay considers the tension between the autonomous theory of international commercial arbitration and the more interactive theory advanced by Gary Born during his keynote address at the recent “Border Skirmishes” symposium at the University of Missouri School of Law. In his presentation, Born considered the relationship between litigation and international commercial arbitration and distinguished between permissible “border crossings” and impermissible “border incursions.” This essay considers how these concepts play out both in routine interactions between courts and tribunals and more in difficult scenarios, such as those involving anti-suit injunctions. The discussion also presents statistics concerning the amount of ancillary …

Making Sense Of Twombly, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In May 2007, the United States Supreme Court decided Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly and sent shockwaves throughout the federal civil justice system. Reversing the Second Circuit, the Court held that an antitrust complaint that alleged mere parallel behavior among rival telecommunications companies, coupled with stray averments of agreement that amounted merely to legal conclusions, failed as a matter of law to state a claim for conspiracy in violation of § 1 of the Sherman Act and had been properly dismissed by the trial court. The Court then proceeded to (1) redefine the concept of notice pleading by "retiring" …

Jurisdictional Discovery In Transnational Litigation: Extraterritorial Effects Of United States Federal Practice, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

This article describes the device in detail, distinguishing it both practically and theoretically from methods used in other common law systems to establish jurisdiction, and discusses how recent US Supreme Court precedent provides international actors with the means of limiting or avoiding this potentially burdensome procedure.

New Pleading, New Discovery, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

Pleading in federal court has a new narrative. The old narrative was one of notice, with the goal of broad access to the civil justice system. New Pleading, after the landmark Supreme Court cases of Twombly and Iqbal, is focused on factual sufficiency, with the purpose of screening out meritless cases that otherwise might impose discovery costs on defendants. The problem with New Pleading is that factual insufficiency often is a poor proxy for meritlessness. Some plaintiffs lack sufficient factual knowledge of the elements of their claims not because the claims lack merit but because the information they need is …

Jurisdictional Discovery In United States Federal Courts, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

The article begins with a discussion of the historical development and jurisprudential bases for jurisdictional discovery, then analyzes the two major structural problems with the device, namely (1) the lack of any identifiable standard regarding when jurisdictional discovery will be ordered and (2) the absence of any understanding about the proper scope of such discovery. Next, the article describes the root causes of these structural inadequacies and proposes several ways to address the root concerns, relying on a new line of Supreme Court precedent (including Ashcroft v. Iqbal) as well as analogies to other common law jurisdictions. The paper concludes …

Federal Pleading And State Presuit Discovery, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

This Article explores the role that state presuit discovery could play in rectifying the information imbalance caused by Twombly and Iqbal - when a plaintiff in federal court requires information in the hands (or minds) of defendants or third parties in order to properly plead her claim, but such information is not discoverable unless the claim can survive a motion to dismiss. First, this Article provides an account of the development of federal pleading standards from before Twombly through their current post-Iqbal state. Second, this Article describes the effects of the post-Iqbal federal pleading standards and highlights the harsh results …

Appellate Review Of Discovery Orders In Federal Court: A Suggested Approach For Handling Privilege Claims, Cassandra Burke Robertson

Faculty Publications

The federal circuit courts of appeals have generally recognized that a party suffers real hardship when the district court erroneously orders it to disclose privileged information. Review of the disclosure order after final judgment is usually an insufficient remedy; once the information has been disclosed, it can never again be fully confidential. Consequently, the courts have struggled to provide a mechanism by which such orders can be immediately appealed. However, privilege orders presenting novel questions of law or issues of first impression do not clearly fit within the doctrinal requirements of the most common methods of interlocutory review. Appellate courts …

Discovery In International Legal Developments Year In Review: 1998, Christopher J. Borgen

Faculty Publications

American procedure regarding international discovery stems from 28 U.S.C. §§ 1781-1783, and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, in particular Rule 28(b). The leading case on the topic of international discovery is the Supreme Court's decision in Société Nationale Industielle Aerospatiale v. United States District Court. Many later cases base their reasoning on interpretations of Aerospatiale. This article is a brief review of developments during the year.

Discovery In International Legal Developments Year In Review: 1997, Christopher J. Borgen

Faculty Publications

U.S. law provides litigants with a variety of means to obtain evidence from foreign jurisdictions. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (the Federal Rules) and rules of state courts may be used if a U.S. court has jurisdiction over the person who is in control of the evidence in question. Section 1783 of tide 28 of the United States Code provides a means for serving a subpoena on U.S. nationals or residents abroad. Litigants may also obtain foreign discovery through letters rogatory as permitted by 28 U.S.C. § 1781 and treaties such as the Hague Convention on Taking Evidence (the …

Criminal Discovery, Scientific Evidence, And Dna, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Discovery In International Legal Developments Year In Review: 1996, Christopher J. Borgen

Faculty Publications

American procedure regarding international discovery stems from 28 U.S.C. §§ 1781-83, and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP or Rule) 28(b). Broadly speaking, these rules are concerned with the mechanics of assessing requests for discovery in the United States to assist a proceeding in a foreign country and attempts by one or more parties before a U.S. court to obtain evidence located in another country. This article serves as a brief review of developments during the year.

Inadvertent Waiver Of The Attorney-Client Privilege By Disclosure Of Documents: An Economic Analysis, Alan J. Meese

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Thomas E. Baker

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Work Product Exception To Discovery - The New York Experience, Glenn E. Coven

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.