Law Commons^™

Absolute Immunity: A License To Rape Justice At Will, Prentice L. White

Prentice L White

ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY: A LICENSE TO RAPE JUSTICE AT WILL BY PRENTICE L. WHITE We are all acquainted with the phrase the sanctity of marriage. We understand that the vows made by a couple at the wedding ceremony is sacrosanct, and if those vows are not taken seriously, or abused in any way, then the offending spouse will be penalized and evicted from the marital relationship. Likewise, justice should be handled in the same manner and with the same intensity. America prides itself on having the best legal system in the world. It broadcasts to all the surrounding nations that its …

Assessing The Applicability Of The Business Judgment Rule And The “Defensive” Business Judgment Rule In The Chinese Judiciary: A Perspective On Takeover Dispute Adjudication, Xiao-Chuan Charlie Weng

Xiao-chuan Charlie Weng

With the surge of takeovers in China, many issues regarding takeover adjudication and legislation have increasingly received academic attention. The issues of the independence and professionalization of the judiciary and the scarcity of legislation on duty of care are the major predicaments facing corporate China. Massive legislative and judicial reform of takeover adjudication is not viable in the near future. However, U.S. common law standards of review, including the business judgment rule and serial rules against hostile takeover, with diacritical the business judgment rule stamp, may hold potential for reform within the current economic environment. The article investigates the problems …

Escaping Legal Limbo: Can Illinois Residents Who Entered Into A Legally Recognized Same-Sex Marriage Or Civil Union In Another State Dissolve Their Marriage In Illinois?, Michelle R. Green, Allen Wall, Jacob H. Karaca, Melissa Sereda

Michelle R. Green

Legal limbo: when a same-sex couple in a valid, legally performed marriage performed in a jurisdiction that recognizes such marriages wants to dissolve their marriage, but now lives in a jurisdiction that refuses to recognize their marriage as valid. This article explores the options available to such couples in Illinois and provides a practical roadmap for practitioners that we think provides the best chance of success for their clients seeking to dissolve a same-sex union.

While Illinois courts have not yet determined whether such a couple may lawfully dissolve their marriage in Illinois, many lessons can be gleaned from other …

Does The Readability Of Your Brief Affect Your Chance Of Winning An Appeal?--An Analysis Of Readability In Appellate Briefs And Its Correlation With Success On Appeal, Lance N. Long, William F. Christensen

Lance N. Long

The study described in this article suggests that the length of sentences and words, which is “readability” for our purposes, probably does not make much difference in appellate brief writing. First, we found that most briefs are written at about the same level of readability; there simply is not much difference in how lawyers write appellate briefs when it comes to the length of sentences and words. Furthermore, the readability of most appellate briefs is well within the reading ability of the highly educated audience of appellate judges and justices. Second, the relatively small differences in readability are not related …

Voluntary Client Testimony As A Privilege Waiver: Is Ohio's Law Caught In A Time Warp?, David B. Alden, Matthew P. Silversten

David B. Alden

Ohio’s attorney-client privilege statute, Ohio Rev. Code § 2317.02(A), has been interpreted to provide for a broad waiver of the attorney-client privilege whenever the client testifies voluntarily, including when the client’s testimony does not disclose the substance of the otherwise privileged communications. Finding a privilege waiver under these circumstances is virtually unique to Ohio. This article (1) traces the origins of this rule back to Ohio’s first code of civil procedure, which was enacted in 1853, (2) identifies the long-forgotten reasons that prompted its adoption; (3) analyzes decisions that have applied it from the mid-nineteenth century through today; (4) assesses …

Pleading Their Case: How Ashcroft V. Iqbal Extinguishes Prisoners’ Rights, Maureen Brocco

Maureen Brocco

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, decided on May 18, 2009, increased the evidentiary burden required to survive a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (“Rule 12(b)(6)”) motion to dismiss to a strict plausibility standard. While this decision affects almost all civil claims in the federal court system, its impact is particularly troublesome in the realm of prisoners’ rights litigation. For a prisoner, such onerous pre-litigation fact-finding requirements can turn the administration of justice into an unattainable goal. Since prisoners’ claims are often against their captors, government officials, this heightened pleading burden may leave victims of egregious unconstitutional actions by government officials without …

Ending Erie's Third Phase: Why The Supreme Court Should Stop Freelancing And Go Back To Drawing Lines Between Substance And Procedure, Jennifer S. Hendricks

Jennifer S. Hendricks

John Hart Ely famously observed, “We were all brought up on sophisticated talk about the fluidity of the line between substance and procedure,” but for most of Erie’s history, the Supreme Court has answered the question “Does this state law govern in federal court?” with a “yes” or a “no.” Beginning, however, with Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, and continuing with Semtek v. Lockheed and Shady Grove v. Allstate, a shifting coalition of justices has pursued a third path. Instead of declaring state law applicable or inapplicable, they have claimed for themselves the prerogative to fashion law that purportedly accommodates …

The Pinkerton Problem, Bruce A. Antkowiak

Bruce A Antkowiak

Pinkerton is a longstanding principle of criminal law that holds a conspirator liable for the substantive crimes of his confederates as long as they were committed during the course of and in furtherance of the conspiracy, and as long as they were objectively and reasonably foreseeable to a defendant. This leads to liability being imposed on individuals who did not personally have the mens rea required to commit the crime for which they are sentenced. The article argues that the use of such conspirator liability rules in many jurisdictions (federal and state) violates both due process and separation of powers …

Live Hearings And Paper Trials, Mark Spottswood

Mark Spottswood

This article explores a constantly recurring procedural question: When is fact-finding improved by a live hearing or trial, and when would it be better to rely on a written record? Unfortunately, when judges, lawyers, and rulemakers consider this issue, they are led astray by the widely shared—but false—assumption that a judge can best determine issues of credibility by viewing the demeanor of witnesses while they are testifying. In fact, a large body of scientific evidence indicates that judges are more likely to be deceived by lying or mistaken witnesses when observing live testimony than if the judges were to review …

Growing Pains: Building American Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated for substantive error even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and …

An Ethical Rabbit Hole: Model Rule 4.4, Intentional Interference With Former Employee Non-Disclosure Agreements And The Threat Of Disqualification, Maura I. Strassberg

Maura I Strassberg

ABSTRACT The Model Rule 4.4 prohibition on the use of methods of obtaining evidence that violate the rights of third parties can be read to prohibit the informal questioning of a former employee with a non-disclosure agreement to advance a proposed or pending lawsuit, as this may constitute the tort of intentional interference with contract. The use of non-disclosure agreements is proliferating and, although actual tort liability in this context has hardly ever been litigated, it is easy to strategically use this tort to allege an ethical violation that can be the basis of a disqualification motion. The threat of …

Foreign Citizens As Members Of Transnational Class Actions, Jay Tidmarsh

Jay Tidmarsh

This Article addresses an increasingly important question: When, if ever, should foreign citizens be included as members of an American class action? The existing consensus holds that foreign citizens whose home forum will not recognize an American class judgment should be excluded from membership. Our analysis begins by establishing that this consensus is seriously flawed and misapprehends the nature of the problem. Using standard tools of economic analysis, we then make two arguments. First, the decision to include or exclude foreign class members should be based upon a comparison of costs and benefits: in particular, the costs generated by foreign …

Growing Pains; Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated for substantive error even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and …

Growing Pains; Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated for substantive error even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and …

Growing Pains; Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated for substantive error even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and …

Growing Pains; Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated for substantive error even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and …

Growing Pains; Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated for substantive error even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and …

Growing Pains; Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated for substantive error even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and …

Growing Pains; Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated for substantive error even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and …

Growing Pains; Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated for substantive error even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and …

Growing Pains; Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated for substantive error even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and …

Growing Pains; Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated for substantive error even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and …

Growing Pains; Building Arbitration's Legitimacy Through Everyday Arbitral Decisions, John B. Mcarthur

John B McArthur

Arbitration’s rapid growth has come under pressure in recent years. A Supreme Court decision holding that awards under the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be vacated for substantive error even if they clearly are wrong has helped discredit arbitration. Misuse of arbitration clauses in consumer, employment, and franchise settings has led to proposals for radical constriction under the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009. Facing these challenges, arbitrators need to ensure the quality of their awards by adhering to the rule of law and resisting the temptation to administer a personal brand of justice. They need to discourage silent awards and …

Procedure, Substance, And Erie, Jay Tidmarsh

Jay Tidmarsh

This article examines the relationship between procedure and substance, and the way in which that relationship affects Erie questions. It first suggests that “procedure” should be understood in terms of process — in other words, in terms of the way that it changes the substance of the law and the value of legal claims. It then argues that the traditional view that the definitions of “procedure” and “substance change with the context — a pillar on which present Erie analysis is based — is wrong. Finally, it suggests a single process-based principle that reconciles all of the Supreme Court’s “procedural …

The Extent To Which "Yellowstonre Injunctions" Apply In Favor Of Residential Tenants: Who Will See Red, Who May Earn Green, And Who May Feel Blue?, Hon. Mark Dillon

Hon. Mark C. Dillon

Difficulties in the residential and commercial real estate markets have caused an influx of cases in the New York State courts by which banks seek the foreclosure of delinquent mortgages and landlords seek the eviction of tenants that are in default of rent payment obligations.

New York State has long recognized "Yellowstone injunctions" in the context of commercial leases, where tenants preemptively obtain court orders enjoining their landlords from terminating their breached leases. The concept is named after its case of origin, First Nat. Stores, Inc. v. Yellowstone Shopping Center, Inc., which was decided by the state's Court of Appeals …

Plausibly Pleading Employment Discrimination, Charles A. Sullivan

Charles A. Sullivan

The Supreme Court’s unanimous 2002 decision in Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., which took a very permissive approach to pleading discrimination claims, may or may not remain good law after Ashcroft v. Iqbal. As is well known, Iqbal took a restrictive approach to pleading generally under the Federal Rules, and its application to employment discrimination cases could pose serious problems for plaintiffs attempting to get into federal court. Further, there is certainly a tension between Swierkiewicz and Iqbal. This is in part because the former is a strong reaffirmation of notice pleading as it has traditionally been understood while the latter …

Seeing The Forest For The Trees: The Transaction Or Occurrence And The Claim Interlock Civil Procedure, Douglas D. Mcfarland

Douglas D. McFarland

The article traces the transaction or occurrence and the claim through various joinder (cross-claims, permissive joinder of parties, rule 14 claims), pleading (claims, separate counts, relation back of amendments), and interlocutory appeal (54(b))rules to the following conclusion. Since courts have struggled with the proper fact-based definition of claim and transaction or occurrence when they interpret individual rules in individual cases, we should not be surprised that courts and commentators have been reluctant to recognize the commonality of these concepts throughout the rules. “Claim” has been interpreted differently in different contexts. “Transaction or occurrence” has been interpreted differently in different contexts. …

Pleading Their Case: How Ashcroft V. Iqbal Extinguishes Prisoners’ Rights, Maureen Brocco

Maureen Brocco

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, decided on May 18, 2009, increased the evidentiary burden required to survive a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (“Rule 12(b)(6)”) motion to dismiss to a strict plausibility standard. While this decision affects almost all civil claims in the federal court system, its impact is particularly troublesome in the realm of prisoners’ rights litigation. For a prisoner, such onerous pre-litigation fact-finding requirements can turn the administration of justice into an unattainable goal. Since prisoners’ claims are often against their captors, government officials, this heightened pleading burden may leave victims of egregious unconstitutional actions by government officials without …

The Uses Of Indispensable Sovereigns: Pimentel And The Evolution Of Rule 19, Katherine J. Florey

Katherine J. Florey

This Article attempts to fill some of the gap in academic treatment of Rule 19 by considering an important and timely issue in the Rule’s application. It makes the argument that, while Rule 19 was originally intended to facilitate the consolidation of litigation by authorizing mandatory joinder of absent parties, it has evolved in an important subset of cases to serve a nearly opposite purpose. That is, in many cases where a party may be affected by the litigation but cannot be joined because it is a sovereign possessing immunity from suit, courts have developed a near-categorical rule that the …

The Extent To Which "Yellowstone Injunctions" Apply In Favor Of Residential Tenants: Who Will See Red, Who May Earn Green, And Who May Feel Blue?, Hon. Mark Dillon

Hon. Mark C. Dillon

Difficulties in the residential and commercial real estate markets have caused an influx of cases in the New York State courts by which banks seek the foreclosure of delinquent mortgages and landlords seek the eviction of tenants that are in default of rent payment obligations.

New York State has long recognized "Yellowstone injunctions" in the context of commercial leases, where tenants preemptively obtain court orders enjoining their landlords from terminating their breached leases. The concept is named after its case of origin, First Nat. Stores, Inc. v. Yellowstone Shopping Center, Inc., which was decided by the state's Court of Appeals …