Law Commons^™

A New Moment For Indian Water Rights Settlements, Max Clayton

Natural Resources Journal

Indian water rights settlements have been the primary mechanism to resolve water conflicts between tribal governments and state, municipal, and non-governmental parties. Although scholars have for decades roundly criticized settlements for their many shortcomings, this paper suggests that a combination of forces has altered the conditions for Indian water rights settlements. Settlement remains a difficult process, but a new moment for Indian water rights settlement may have arrived. This paper explains how political conditions have changed and makes a novel legal argument to supply a strategy for tribal governments to advance their bargaining position in settlement discussions.

Employee Nondisclosure Agreements In South Carolina: Easily Made, Easily Broken, Samuel C. Williams

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

When Worlds Collide: Protecting Physical World Interests Against Virtual World Malfeasance, Hilary Silvia, Nanci K. Carr

Michigan Technology Law Review

If a virtual-world-game character is cast upon real-world property without the consent of the landowner, inducing or encouraging players to trespass, is the virtual-world creator liable for damages? The United States Supreme Court has recognized that digital technology presents novel issues, the resolution of which must anticipate its further rapid development. It is beyond dispute that protective legislation will be unable to keep up with rapidly evolving technology. The burden of anticipating and addressing issues presented by emerging technologies will ultimately fall upon the businesses responsible for generating them. This duty was most notably adopted by the creators of Pokémon …

Enforcing The Bargain V. Materiality Requirement: The Future Of Disclosure-Only Settlements Post-Trulia, Hao Jiang

Pace Law Review

In In re Trulia, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, the Delaware Court of Chancery broke away from its tradition of routinely approving disclosure-only settlements and required disclosures to be material in order to cure the conflict of interest between plaintiff’s counsel and the plaintiff class. I argue that fairness of settlement is the only standard in approving class action settlements and fairness will not be achieved by requiring materiality. Shareholders are legally entitled to all material information, as the board’s fiduciary duty dictates. Thus, material disclosures are enforcement of a legal duty that is no consideration for the release of shareholder claims. …

The Unsettling Effect Of Maine Law On Settlement In Cases Involving Multiple Tortfeasors, Arlyn H. Weeks

Maine Law Review

When more than one person or entity causes injury to another, the multiple tortfeasors are jointly and severally liable to the injured party under Maine law. Maine has also provided since 1965 for comparison of the negligence of plaintiffs and defendants so that a plaintiff may not recover if his causative negligence is found to have equaled or exceeded that of the defendant. In addition, title 14, section 156 of the Maine Revised Statutes gives to each defendant the right to request that the jury allocate percentages of fault “contributed by each defendant.” Finally, title 14, section 163 of the …

Never Settle For Second Best? Cy Pres Distributions In Securities Class Action Settlements, Brianna S. Hills

Missouri Law Review

There is an old adage that one should “never settle for second best.” While this advice is arguably well taken in most areas of life, it is less useful in settlement discussions. In 2015, more federal securities class actions were filed than during the height of the financial crisis in 2008, with more of those cases settling than in any year since 2011.1Consumer class action funds often go largely unclaimed, leaving settlement funds intended to compensate injured plaintiffs unused and undistributed

Pay-For-Delay: How Brand-Name And Generic Pharmaceutical Drug Companies Collude And Cost Consumer Billions, Raymond J. Prince

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Litigation: Proof Of Concept For The Manual For Complex Litigation And The 2015 Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, John C. Cruden, Steve O'Rourke, Sarah D. Himmelhoch

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

On April 20, 2010, the oil rig Deepwater Horizon exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, killing eleven people and injuring seventeen more. Efforts to stop the spill failed. For the next eighty-seven days, hundreds of millions of barrels of oil poured into the Gulf. This catastrophe not only changed the lives of the families of the dead and injured and the communities who experienced the economic and social disruption of the spill – it challenged the survival of the ecosystem of the ninth largest water body in the world. The oil spill extended fifty miles offshore from Louisiana in the …

Making A Buck While Making A Difference, Alphonse A. Gerhardstein

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

It is not right for children to die before their parents. It is not right for peaceful, unarmed citizens to die at the hands of the police. In my civil rights practice, I have met many mothers, fathers, and family members who are struggling to recover after a law enforcement officer caused the death of their loved one. Sure, they want fair compensation. But money does little to reduce their loss or make the grief more bearable. They often want to do something that will ensure that their loved one did not die in vain. They want to prevent other …

Texas's Excessive Demand Doctrine Impacts Recoveries In Litigation., Stephanie M. Green

St. Mary's Law Journal

A party demanding money they are not entitled to becomes subject to the excessive demand doctrine. Because the excessive demand doctrine is an affirmative defense, a defending party must allege its claim of excessive demand in its pleadings. A party must “plead it, prove it, and obtain findings of fact on its essential elements.” To obtain findings on the issue, both the pleadings and the evidence are required to put a question or instruction before the jury. Ensuring that the evidence is enough depends upon the trial court—whose judgment will only be overturned upon a showing of an abuse of …

The Private Causes Of Action Under Cercla: Navigating The Intersection Of Sections 107(A) And 113(F), Jeffrey M. Gaba

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

The Comprehensive Environmental, Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) provides three distinct “private” causes of action that allow parties to recover all or part of their cleanup costs from “potentially responsible parties.” Section 107(a)(4)(B) provides a “direct” right of cost recovery. Sections 113(f)(1) and 113(f)(3)(B) provide a right of contribution following a CERCLA civil action or certain judicial or administrative settlements. The relationship among these causes of action has been the source of considerable confusion. Two Supreme Court cases, Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Aviall Services, Inc. and United States v. Atlantic Research Corp. have identified certain situations in which the …

Admit Or Deny: A Call For Reform Of The Sec's "Neither-Admit-Nor-Deny" Policy, Priyah Kaul

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

For four decades, the SEC’s often-invoked policy of settling cases without requiring admissions of wrongdoing, referred to as the “neither-admit-nor-deny” policy, went unchallenged by the courts, the legislature, and the public. Then in 2011, a harshly critical opinion from Judge Jed Rakoff in SEC v. Citigroup incited demands for reform of this policy. In response to Judge Rakoff’s opinion, the SEC announced a modified approach to settlements. Under the modified approach, the Commission may require an admission of wrongdoing if a defendant’s misconduct was egregious or if the public markets would benefit from an admission. Many supporters of the neither-admit-nor-deny …

Patent Punting: How Fda And Antitrust Courts Undermine The Hatch-Waxman Act To Avoid Dealing With Patents, Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Daniel A. Crane

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, patent law and FDA regulation work together to determine the timing of generic entry in the market for drugs. But FDA has sought to avoid any responsibility for reading patents, insisting that its role in administering the patent provisions of the Hatch-Waxman Act is purely ministerial. This gap in regulatory oversight has allowed innovators to use irrelevant patents to defer generic competition. Meanwhile, patent litigation has set the stage for anticompetitive settlements rather than adjudication of the patent issues in the courts. As these settlements have provoked antitrust litigation, antitrust courts have proven no more willing …

Agency Costs And The False Claims Act, David Farber

Fordham Law Review

The False Claims Act represents the U.S. Justice Department’s most effective tool in detecting, punishing, and deterring fraud against the government. The effectiveness of the False Claims Act is due in large part to the law’s qui tam provisions, which provide a private right of action to whistleblowers who may sue fraudsters on behalf of the government in exchange for a percentage of the recovery. The resulting relationship between the government and whistleblowers has led to increased detection and recoveries from corporate defendants who defraud and abuse government programs.
However, these whistleblower provisions also come with social costs where profit-motivated …

Auctioning Class Settlements, Jay Tidmarsh

William & Mary Law Review

Although class actions promise better deterrence at a lower cost, they are infected with problems that can keep them from delivering on this promise. One of these problems occurs when the agents for the class—the class representative and class counsel—advance their own interests at the expense of the class. Controlling agency cost, which often manifests itself at the time of settlement, has been the impetus behind a number of class action reform proposals.

This Article develops a proposal that, in conjunction with reforms in fee structure and opt-out rights, controls agency costs at the time of settlement. The idea is …

Cure For Collusive Settlements: The Case For A Per Se Prohibition On Pay-For-Delay Agreements In Pharmaceutical Patent Litigation, A , Michael Owens

Missouri Law Review

This Comment will examine how the particulars of the Hatch-Waxman Act, the regulatory scheme that governs generic competition in pharmaceutical industry, gives rise to reverse settlements in infringement litigation; review existing analysis of the pay for delay problem in judicial decisions, in academic commentary, and amongst antitrust enforcement bodies; and finally, draw upon a decision theoretic framework to propose per se illegality as the appropriate antitrust rule for pay-for-delay settlements.

In California Excess Liability Cases, Does “Bad Faith” In Law Equal “Strict Liability” In Practice?, Roger D. Marlow, Ronald E. Magnuson

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judges! Stop Deferring To Class-Action Lawyers, Brian Wolfman

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat

I represent a national non-profit consumer rights organization, as an amicus, in a federal appeal challenging a district court’s approval of a class-action settlement of claims under the federal Credit Repair Organization Act (CROA). My client maintains that the district court erred in finding that the settlement was “fair, reasonable, and adequate,” which is the standard for class-action settlement approval under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In particular, we argue that the district court committed a reversible legal error when it deferred to the class-action lawyers’ recommendation to approve the settlement because, in those lawyers’ view, it was fair, …

Pharmaceutical Patent Litigation Settlements: Balancing Patent & Antitrust Policy Through Institutional Choice, Timothy A. Cook

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Should a branded pharmaceutical company be allowed to pay a generic competitor to stay out of the market for a drug? Antitrust policy implies that such a deal should be prohibited, but the answer becomes less clear when the transaction is packaged as a patent-litigation settlement. Since Congress passed the Hatch-Waxman Act, which encourages generic manufacturers to challenge pharmaceutical patent validity, settlements of this kind have been on the rise. Congress, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Trade Commission have condemned these agreements as anticompetitive and costly to American consumers, but none of these bodies has been able to …

Representation In Mediation: What We Know From Empirical Research, Roselle L. Wissler

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Article first describes the proportion of unrepresented parties in mediation and the policies and practices regarding representation in different mediation contexts. The core of the Article examines the empirical findings on the effect of representation on several dimensions of the mediation process, including the effect on preparation for mediation, party perceptions of the fairness of the process and pressures to settle, the extent of party "voice" and participation in mediation, and the tone of the session. In addition, the Article examines the effect of representation on mediation outcomes, including the likelihood of settlement and the fairness of agreements reached. …

Pharmaceutical Reverse Payment Settlements: Presumptions, Procedural Burdens, And Covenants Not To Sue Generic Drug Manufacturers, Catherine J. K. Sandoval

Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal

No abstract provided.

What Do We Talk About When We Talk About Mass Torts?, Anthony J. Sebok

Michigan Law Review

Twenty years ago, Deborah Hensler and a team of scholars at the RAND Corporation's Institute for Civil Justice issued a report entitled Trends in Tort Litigation: The Story Behind the Statistics. Pressure had been mounting both in the business community and the Republican Party to "reform" tort law throughout the 1980s. There was concern that Americans "egged on by avaricious lawyers, sue[d] too readily, and irresponsible juries and activist judges wayla[id] blameless businesses at enormous cost to social and economic well-being." The RAND report argued that the real risk of a torts "explosion" came from the world of mass …

Why Should Businesses Hire Settlement Counsel, Kathy A. Bryan

Journal of Dispute Resolution

As a former in-house litigation manager, I hired separate settlement counsel in only a few cases and with varying results. With responsibilities for hiring and managing a large portfolio of outside firms, I was loath to increase case-staffing ranks for many reasons-and cost was only one factor. Internal resources must oversee litigation, and having another set of outside lawyer relationships on the same case generally seemed duplicative. Worse, it demanded more of my scarce time to manage both the relationship and the primary litigation firm

The Curious Complications With Back-End Opt-Out Rights, Rhonda Wasserman

William & Mary Law Review

In recent years, class members have been afforded delayed, or "back-end," opportunities to opt out of a class action once the terms of the settlement are disclosed. These back-end opt-out rights may afford only limited rights to sue outside the confines of the class action. For example, opt-out plaintiffs may be permitted to seek compensatory, but not punitive damages. Does the federal court that approved the settlement have authority to enjoin back-end opt-out plaintiffs from seeking relief in state court that exceeds the limits built into the back-end opt-out right?

Three sets of curious complications may arise if the federal …

Law's Limited Domain Confronts Morality's Universal Empire, Larry Alexander, Frederick Schauer

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Settler's Remorse, Floyd Abrams

Michigan Law Review

Who can quarrel with the notion that settling civil cases is generally a good thing? Litigation is expensive, time-consuming, preoccupying, and often personally destructive. Our courts are overburdened and, in any event, imperfect decision-making entities. It may even be true that, more often than not, "the absolute result of a trial is not as high a quality of justice as is the freely negotiated, give a little, take a little settlement." But not every case should be settled. Many are worthless. The settlement of others could too easily lead to a torrent of unwarranted litigation. Sometimes, as Professor Owen Fiss …

Illuminating Secrecy: A New Economic Analysis Of Confidential Settlements, Scott A. Moss

Michigan Law Review

Even the most hotly contested lawsuits typically end in a confidential settlement forbidding the parties from disclosing their allegations, evidence, or settlement amount. Confidentiality draws fierce criticism for harming third parties by concealing serious misdeeds like discrimination, pollution, defective manufacturing, and sexual abuse. Others defend confidentiality as a mutually beneficial pay-for-silence bargain that facilitates settlement, serves judicial economy, and prevents frivolous copycat lawsuits. This debate is based in economic logic, yet most analyses have been surprisingly shallow as to how confidentiality affects incentives to settle. Depicting a more nuanced, complex reality of litigation and settlement, this Article reaches several conclusions …

The Ramifications Of The W.H. Sammis Settlement: Why Jobs Are Being Lost, The Air Remains Unclean, And This Landmark Settlement Is Making Progress In The Wrong Direction, Michael Paul Pegman

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

The Legality Of The West Bank Wall: Israel's High Court Of Justice V. The International Court Of Justice, Victor Kattan

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Article offers a critique of the decision reached by Israel's High Court of Justice in the Mara'abe Case (2005) as well as some aspects of the International Court of Justice's Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (2004). The Article takes a socio-legal and facts-based approach to analyzing the decisions' discussions of settlements, self-determination, and self-defense, examining all three topics in light of several recent legal and political developments.

The International Tribunal For The Law Of The Sea And The Possibility Of Judicial Settlement Of Disputes Involving The Fishing Entity Of Taiwan - Taking Ccsbt As An Example, Yann-Huei Song

San Diego International Law Journal

The main purpose of this paper is to assess the possibility of judicial settlement of fishery disputes involving the fishing entity of Taiwan and examine the legal questions regarding jurisdiction over the disputes. This analysis is based on the articles related to dispute settlement that are provided in the SBT Convention, the ITLOS Statute and the international law of the sea and the judicial practice of the ITLOS and other relevant arbitration courts in the Southern Bluefin Tuna case. Following this introductory section, Section II describes the establishment of the CCSBT and the selection and application of the methods of …