Law Commons^™

Has Shoe Run Its Course?, David W. Ichel

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Guidelines And Best Practices For Large And Mass-Tort Mdls (Second Edition), Bolch Judicial Institute

Bolch Judicial Institute Publications

Mass-tort MDLs dominate the federal civil docket, yet they present enormous challenges to transferee judges assigned to manage them. There is little official guidance and no rules specific to the management of mass-tort MDLs, often requiring the transferee judge to develop procedures out of whole cloth.

Beginning in 2013, the Bolch Judicial Institute (then the Center for Judicial Studies) sought to address this issue through a series of annual bench-bar conferences. From these conferences came the Guidelines and Best Practices for Large and Mass-Tort MDLs document — now in its Second Edition — which is designed to help judges and …

A New Guard At The Courthouse Door: Corporate Personal Jurisdiction In Complex Litigation After The Supreme Court’S Decision Quartet, David W. Ichel

Faculty Scholarship

In a quartet of recent decisions, the Supreme Court substantially reshaped the analysis of due process limits for a state's exercise of personal jurisdiction over corporations for the first time since its groundbreaking 1945 decision in International Shoe Co. v. Washington. The Court's decision quartet recasts the International Shoe continuum of corporate contacts for which it would be "reasonable" for the state to exercise jurisdiction based on "traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice" into a more rigid bright-line dichotomy between "general" and "specific" jurisdiction: for a state to exercise general (or all-purpose) jurisdiction over any suit, regardless of …

Are We Insane? The Quest For Proportionality In The Discovery Rules Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Paul W. Grimm

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Professor Stephen E. Sachs As Amicus Curiae, Bnsf Railway Co. V. Tyrrell, Stephen E. Sachs

Faculty Scholarship

[This brief was filed in support of the petitioner in No. 16-405 (U.S., cert. granted Jan. 13, 2017).]

BNSF Railway Co. should win this case, but on statutory grounds alone. BNSF makes three arguments:

1) That Daimler AG v. Bauman forbids Montana’s exercise of general personal jurisdiction here;

2) That Congress has not sought to license the state’s exercise of jurisdiction; and

3) That such a license would be void under the Fourteenth Amendment.

BNSF’s first two arguments are fully persuasive and decide the case. As a result, the Court should decline to reach the third argument. Not only is …

Neutralizing The Stratagem Of “Snap Removal”: A Proposed Amendment To The Judicial Code, Arthur Hellman, Lonny Hoffman, Thomas D. Rowe Jr., Joan Steinman, Georgene Vairo

Faculty Scholarship

The “Removal Jurisdiction Clarification Act” is a narrowly tailored legislative proposal designed to resolve a widespread conflict in the federal district courts over the proper interpretation of the statutory “forum-defendant” rule.

The forum-defendant rule prohibits removal of a diversity case “if any of the parties in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the [forum state].” 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2) (emphasis added). Some courts, following the “plain language” of the statute, hold that defendants can avoid the constraints of the rule by removing diversity cases to federal court when a citizen of the forum state has …

Race, Class, And Access To Civil Justice, Sara Sternberg Greene

Faculty Scholarship

After many years of inattention, policymakers are now focused on troubling statistics indicating that members of poor and minority groups are less likely than their higher-income counterparts to seek help when they experience a civil justice problem. Indeed, roughly three-quarters of the poor do not seek legal help when they experience a civil justice problem, and inaction is even more pronounced among poor blacks. Past work on access to civil justice largely relies on unconfirmed assumptions about the behavior patterns and needs of those experiencing civil justice problems. At a time when increased attention and resources are being devoted to …

Five Questions After Atlantic Marine, Stephen E. Sachs

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court’s Atlantic Marine ruling did a lot to clear up the law of forum selection. But it also left a number of live questions in place. This essay briefly discusses five of them. When a party wants to move a case to the selected forum, what procedures can it use, other than venue transfer or forum non conveniens? When is a forum selection clause valid and enforceable, as a matter of state or federal law? If the clause isn’t valid, should a federal court still give it any weight? What if there are multiple parties or claims, and …

The Teaching Of Procedure Across Common Law Systems, Erik S. Knusten, Thomas D. Rowe Jr., David Bamford, Shirley Shipman

Faculty Scholarship

What difference does the teaching of procedure make to legal education, legal scholarship, the legal profession, and civil justice reform? This first of four articles on the teaching of procedure canvasses the landscape of current approaches to the teaching of procedure in four legal systems—the United States, Canada, Australia, and England and Wales—surveying the place of procedure in the law school curriculum and in professional training, the kinds of subjects that “procedure” encompasses, and the various ways in which procedure is learned. Little sustained reflection has been carried out as to the import and impact of this longstanding law school …

Brief Of Professor Stephen E. Sachs As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Neither Party, Stephen E. Sachs

Faculty Scholarship

The parties in this case defend two sides of a many-sided circuit split. This brief argues that a third view is correct.

If a contract requires suit in a particular forum, and the plaintiff sues somewhere else, how may the defendant raise the issue? Petitioner Atlantic Marine Construction Company suggests a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3) or 28 U.S.C. § 1406, on the theory that the contract renders venue improper. Respondent J-Crew Management, Inc. contends that venue remains proper, and that the defendant¹s only remedy is a transfer motion under § 1404.

Both sides are wrong. Forum-selection …

Evaluating And Improving The Mdl Process, Francis Mcgovern, John G. Heyburn

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Sonia, What’S A Nice Person Like You Doing In Company Like That, Thomas D. Rowe Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

If We Don’T Get Civil Gideon: Trying To Make The Best Of The Civil-Justice Market, Thomas D. Rowe Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

This article considers what market-oriented or market-regulation approaches might be most practical and helpful in trying to satisfy unmet civil legal-service needs and how much it appears that such approaches may be able to succeed in doing so.

Civil Procedure To Enforce Transnational Rights?, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Reflection On Rulemaking: The Rule 11 Experience, Paul D. Carrington, Andrew Wasson

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Obsolescence Of The United States Courts Of Appeals: Roscoe Pound’S Structural Solution, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Teaching Civil Procedure: A Retrospective View, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Transcript Of The “Alumni” Panel On Discovery Reform, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Virtual Civil Litigation: A Visit To John Bunyan’S Celestial City, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Renovating Discovery, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Empirical Evidence On Settlement Devices: Does Rule 68 Encourage Settlement?, Thomas D. Rowe Jr., David A. Anderson

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Pretrial Case Management Under The Amended Rules: Too Many Words For A Good Idea, Michael E. Tigar

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Defining Finality And Appealability By Court Rule: A Comment On Martineau’S Right Problem, Wrong Solution, Thomas D. Rowe Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Book Review, Curtis A. Bradley, Jack L. Goldsmith

Faculty Scholarship

Reviewing, Gary B. Born & David Westin, International Civil Litigation in the United States Courts (1992) (with Jack L. Goldsmith)

The New Order In Judicial Rulemaking, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

Factional politics is jeopardizing the federal rulemaking process. What is needed is an independent group to organize efforts to protect the rules in Congress and to provide a constituency for the Supreme Court in the exercise of its authority under the Rules Enabling Act.

The Seventh Amendment: Some Bicentennial Reflections, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Whose Advantage After All: A Comment On The Comparison Of Civil Justice Systems, Herbert L. Bernstein

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Making Rules To Dispose Of Manifestly Unfounded Assertions: An Exorcism Of The Bogy Of Non-Trans-Substantive Rules Of Civil Procedure, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Continuing Work On The Civil Rules: The Summons, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Function Of The Civil Appeal: A Late Century View, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.