Law Commons^™

The Effects Of Comparable‐Case Guidance On Awards For Pain And Suffering And Punitive Damages: Evidence From A Randomized Controlled Trial, Hillel J. Bavli, Reagan Mozer

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Damage awards for pain and suffering and punitive damages are notoriously unpredictable. Courts provide minimal, if any, guidance to jurors determining these awards, and apply similarly minimal standards in reviewing them. Lawmakers have enacted crude measures, such as damage caps, aimed at curbing award unpredictability, while ignoring less drastic alternatives that involve guiding jurors with information regarding damage awards in comparable cases (“comparable‐case guidance” or “prior‐award information”). The primary objections to the latter approach are based on the argument that, because prior‐award information uses information regarding awards in distinct cases, it introduces the possibility of biasing the award, or distorting …

The Litigation Privilege As A Shelter For Miscreant Legal Counsel, Marc I. Steinberg, Logan J. Weissler

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This article focuses on a pressing issue of national importance related to attorney conduct (or misconduct). The Litigation Privilege is a long-recognized immunity fashioned for attorneys to enable them to perform their functions as zealous advocates and litigators, without having to consider prospective non-client lawsuits aimed at their conduct in the course of representation. However, recent case law purports to expand the Litigation Privilege outside of its traditional contexts, posing a nationwide threat to attorney ethical standards. Broad readings of what sorts of legal assistance constitute “litigation” for the purposes of the application of the Litigation Privilege have recently been …

Terrorist Watchlists, Jeffrey D. Kahn

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This chapter assesses the legal history and policy development of the U.S. government's system of terrorist watchlists and the institutions established to create and use them. Watchlisting is in fact an old practice given new meaning by technological change and the societal impact of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Statutes and judicial precedents from an earlier era on which the first post-9/11 watchlists were built were not made to regulate the expanded uses of the new watchlists and presented few if any constraints on their development. Civil litigation has both revealed the inner workings of terrorist watchlists and spurred …

Cognitive Bias, The 'Band Of Experts,' And The Anti-Litigation Narrative, Elizabeth G. Thornburg

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

In December of 2015, yet another set of discovery rule amendments that are designed to limit discovery will go into effect. This article argues that the consistent pattern of discovery retrenchment is no accident. Rather, a combination of forces is at work. The Supreme Court consistently signals its contempt for the discovery process, and the Chief Justice’s pattern of appointments to the Rules Committees skews toward Big Law defense-side lawyers and judges appointed by Republican Presidents. In addition, longstanding corporate media campaigns have created and reinforced an anti-litigation narrative that, through the power of repetition, dominates public discourse. Further, predictable …

The Underappreciated Importance Of The Sequence In Which The Issues Are Addressed In Contract Litigation, Gregory S. Crespi

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Judicial opinions rarely identify the precise sequence in which the issues presented were addressed by the court. Since this sequence is not generally regarded as being significant for the decisions reached, persons later parsing the opinions for their significance rarely go to the considerable trouble involved in acquiring the litigation briefs and interviewing the attorneys and judges involved so as to ascertain this sequence. However, my surmise is that at least in contract litigation the sequence in which the issues are addressed can sometimes be significant or even outcome-determinative for the results. A good example of this is presented by …

Defining Civil Disputes: Lessons From Two Jurisdictions, Elizabeth G. Thornburg, Camille Cameron

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Court systems have adopted a variety of mechanisms to narrow the issues in dispute and expedite litigation. This article analyses the largely unsuccessful attempts in two jurisdictions - the United States and Australia - to achieve early and efficient issue identification in civil disputes. Procedures that rely on pleadings to provide focus have failed for centuries, from the common (English) origins of these two systems to their divergent modern paths. Case management practices that are developing in the United States and Australia offer greater promise in the continuing quest for early, efficient dispute definition. Based on a historical and contemporary …

Blurring The Lines Between Pleading Doctrines: The Enhanced Rule 8(A)(2) Plausibility Pleading Standard Converges With The Heightened Fraud Pleading Standards Under Rule 9(B) And The Pslra, Marc I. Steinberg, Diego E. Gomez-Cornejo

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This article focuses on the Supreme Court’s recent enhancement of Rule 8(a)(2)’s pleading standard to approach the heightened fraud pleading standards under Rule 9(b) and the PSLRA. The authors posit that the introduction of a tacit “probability requirement” into the basic pleading standard impedes the heightened fraud pleading standards under Rule 9(b) and the PSLRA from fulfilling the policy rationales for which they were created. By elevating the basic requirements that must be met in any federal civil case for a complaint to be legally sufficient, the Supreme Court has caused an evident convergence of pleading standards that blurs the …

The Curious Appellate Judge: Ethical Limits On Independent Research, Elizabeth G. Thornburg

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Appellate judges in the twenty-first century find themselves in a world in which litigation - both civil and criminal - involves a vast array of complex and technical factual disputes. These lawsuits, in turn, may cause judges to seek a greater level of expertise in order to deal competently with the evidence that will be relevant to the disputes. At the same time, advances in communication technology have brought the world's library to the courthouse, requiring no onerous trips across town or index searches but only the click of a mouse. This combination of felt need and ready access has …

Designer Trials, Elizabeth G. Thornburg

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This article considers the intersection of freedom of contract and the trials that have not vanished. Could contracting parties effectively agree in advance of a dispute that any litigation of the case will comply with certain rules? Would such an agreement be enforced even in a contract of adhesion? If so, parties with sufficient bargaining leverage could design away many of the characteristics of litigation that they find unappealing, without the need to resort to private processes. The result: a designer trial with the procedural deck stacked in favor of the party with the greatest pre-dispute bargaining power.

Such a …

Metaphors Matter: How Images Of Battle, Sports And Sex Shape The Adversary System, Elizabeth G. Thornburg

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Metaphors are not pretty figures of speech; they affect the way people within cultures perceive reality. It is therefore significant that the metaphors most commonly used for the adversary system center on war and sports. This tends to over-emphasize the competitive aspects of litigation and disguise opportunities for more cooperative behavior. This article collects and analyzes those metaphors, and discusses the reasons for their powerful hold on legal culture. It also considers some of the negative effects of the metaphorical system and speculates about whether we could find and nurture alternative metaphors.

Sanctifying Secrecy: The Mythology Of The Corporate Attorney-Client Privilege, Elizabeth G. Thornburg

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This article surveys the traditional justifications for giving corporations the benefit of attorney-client privilege. It rejects both moral and utilitarian explanations and argues that, far from being beneficial or benign, the privilege actually does great harm to the truth-seeking function of litigation and imposes tremendous transaction costs on the litigants and on the judicial system as a whole.

Jury Instructions: A Persistent Failure To Communicate, Elizabeth G. Thornburg, Walter W. Steele Jr.

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This article reports on an empirical study of juror comprehension of pattern jury instructions. It demonstrated that comprehension of the original instructions was poor, but that rewriting significantly improved their ability to understand and explain the meaning of the instructions. A separate study showed that jurors report that they discuss and consider the language of the instructions provided to them.

Summary Judgements In Antitrust Conspiracy Litigation, C. Paul Rogers Iii.

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

No abstract provided.