Law Commons^™

Summary Of Sylver V. Regents Bank, N.A., 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 30, Kelli Michelle Devaney

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Consolidated appeals from a district court order confirming an arbitration award and an amended judgment and order of sale, in which the Court considered two issues: (1) whether an arbitration awards was obtained through undue means and (2) whether the arbitrator’s refusal to void a loan in the underlying dispute constituted a manifest disregard for the law.

Summary Of Rock Bay, Llc V. Dist. Ct., 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 21, Katelyn J. Cantu

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This is an original petition for a writ of prohibition challenging district court orders refusing to quash subpoenas as to Petitioners Rock Bay, LLC and Maybourne, a Nevada Corporation.

Removing Removal's Unanimity Rule, Jayne Ressler

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Class Actions, Heightened Commonality, And Declining Access To Justice, A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

A prerequisite to being certified as a class under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is that there are "questions of law or fact common to the class." Although this “commonality” requirement had heretofore been regarded as something that was easily satisfied, in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes the Supreme Court gave it new vitality by reading into it an obligation to identify among the class a common injury and common questions that are "central" to the dispute. Not only is such a reading of Rule 23’s commonality requirement unsupported by the text of the rule, but …

Remedies: A Guide For The Perplexed, Doug Rendleman

Scholarly Articles

Remedies is one of a law student’s most practical courses. Remedies students and their professors learn to work with their eyes on the question at the end of litigation: what can the court do for the successful plaintiff? Remedies develops students’ professional identities and broadens their professional horizons by reorganizing their analysis of procedure, torts, contracts, and property around choosing and measuring relief - compensatory damages, punitive damages, an injunction, specific performance, disgorgement, and restitution. This article discusses the law-school course in Remedies - the content of the Remedies course, the Remedies classroom experience, and Remedies outside the classroom through …

The Twin Aims Of Erie, Michael S. Green

Faculty Publications

We all remember the twin aims of the Erie rule from first-year civil procedure. A federal court sitting in diversity must use forum state law if it is necessary to avoid 'forum shopping" and the "inequitable administration of the laws." This Article offers a reading of the twin aims and a systematic analysis of their proper role in federal and state court. I argue that the twin aims apply in diversity cases not because they protect state interests, but because they serve the federal purposes standing behind the diversity statute. So understood, they are about separation of powers, not federalism. …

Shrinking Gideon And Expanding Alternatives To Lawyers, Stephanos Bibas

All Faculty Scholarship

This essay, written as part of a symposium at Washington and Lee Law School entitled Gideon at 50: Reassessing the Right to Counsel, argues that the standard academic dream of expanding the right to counsel to all criminal and major civil cases has proven to be an unattainable mirage. We have been spreading resources too thin, in the process slighting the core cases such as capital and other serious felonies that are the most complex and need the most time and money. Moreover, our legal system is overengineered, making the law too complex and legal services too expensive for …

Some Important Causes For Settlement In American Civil Litigation, Felipe Forte Cobo

LLM Theses and Essays

This paper focuses on pure economic disputes such as contract, real property and tort conflicts, in which the economic efficiency model is very accepted. In this limited scenario, the consensual resolution of disputes is always more efficient than decisions made by a third-party decision-maker, whether from a post-trial or pre-trial perspective.

Considering that lower transaction costs drive parties towards settlement, part II of this essay provides an overview of the American costs of legal disputes, framing several issues that might be determinative to settlements. Part III explores how two specific American procedural institutes – discovery and civil jury trial – …

Summary Of Stubbs V. Strickland, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 15, David H. Rigdon

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This is a consolidated appeal from a district court order dismissing an action for anti-SLAPP relief and from a post judgment district court order denying attorney fees and costs.

Summary Of I. Cox Construction Co. V. Ch2 Investments, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 14, Katelyn M. Franklin

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered I. Cox Construction Company, LLC’s (Cox) appeal from a district court’s order releasing Cox’s mechanic’s lien. Cox challenged the district court’s finding that the lien was untimely as clearly erroneous, arguing (1) the court should not have considered the timeliness of the lien in light of parties’ failure to raise the issue in pleadings; and (2) the district court incorrectly relied on Vaughn Materials v. Meadowvale Homes to find the lien untimely.

Summary Of Peck V. Crouser, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 12, Ivy Hensel

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Whether the Court has jurisdiction to review an appeal of a post-judgment district court order that declared the appellant to be a vexatious litigant.

Class Actions, Heightened Commonality, And Declining Access To Justice, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

A prerequisite to being certified as a class under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is that there are "questions of law or fact common to the class. " Although this "commonality" requirement had heretofore been regarded as something that was easily satisfied, in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes the Supreme Court gave the requirement new vitality by reading into it an obligation to identify among the class a common injury and common questions that are "central" to the dispute. Not only is such a reading of Rule 23 's commonality requirement unsupported by the text of …

Summary Of Morrow V. Dist. Ct., 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 69, David H. Rigdon

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An original petition for a writ of mandamus from a district court order rejecting petitioner’s peremptory challenge of a judge in a divorce action.

Summary Of Garcia V. Prudential Ins. Co. Of America, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 3, Benjamin K. Reitz

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An appeal addressing the preclusive effect of a judgment entered by a federal district court sitting in diversity.

Death Of Paradox: The Killer Logic Beneath The Standards Of Proof, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The prevailing but contested view of proof standards is that factfinders should determine facts by probabilistic reasoning. Given imperfect evidence, they should ask themselves what they think the chances are that the burdened party would be right if the truth were to become known; they then compare those chances to the applicable standard of proof.

I contend that for understanding the standards of proof, the modern versions of logic — in particular, fuzzy logic and belief functions — work better than classical probability. This modern logic suggests that factfinders view evidence of an imprecisely perceived and described reality to form …

(Still) A "Real And Substantial" Mess: The Law Of Jurisdiction In Canada, Tanya Monestier

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Due Process And The Future Of Class Actions, Alexandra Lahav

Faculty Articles and Papers

No abstract provided.

Symmetry And Class Action Litigation, Alexandra Lahav

Faculty Articles and Papers

In ordinary litigation, parties often have different resources to devote to their lawsuit. This is a problem because the adversarial system is predicated on two (or more) parties, equal and opposite one another, making their best arguments to a neutral judge. The class action is a procedural device that aims to equalize resources between individual plaintiffs and organizational defendants by allowing plaintiffs to pool their claims. Current developments of class action doctrine, however, reinforce in the courtroom the asymmetry that exists between individual plaintiffs and organizational defendants outside the court. This Article explores these trends and the questions they raise. …

Professor Edward Cooper: The Quintessential Reporter, Mary Kay Kane

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Preliminary Injunction Standards In Massachusetts State And Federal Courts, Arthur D. Wolf

Faculty Scholarship

Concurrent jurisdiction frequently allows attorneys the choice of filing a complaint in state or federal court. State courts presumptively have jurisdiction over claims rooted in federal law. At times, state courts are required to entertain federal claims. Similarly, federal courts have authority over state claims because of diversity, federal question, and supplemental jurisdiction. Many claims are rooted in both state and federal law, such as antitrust, civil rights, environmental, consumer protection, and civil liberties. Confronted with the choice of state or federal court, the attorney must evaluate a variety of factors before deciding in which court to file.

In a …

Rule 37(A)'S Loser-Pays "Mandate": More Bark Than Bite, Lindsey D. Blanchard

McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

A Jurisdictional Perspective On New York Times V. Sullivan, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

New York Times v. Sullivan, arguably the Supreme Court's most significant First Amendment decision, marks its fiftieth anniversary next year. Often overlooked in discussions of the case's impact on the freedom of speech and freedom of the press is that it arose from a complex puzzle of constitutional, statutory, and judge-made jurisdictional and procedural rules. These kept the case in hostile Alabama state courts for four years and a half-million-dollar judgment before the Times and its civil rights leader co-defendants finally could avail themselves of the structural protections of federal court and Article III judges. The case's outcome and …

Six Degrees Of Separation: From Derivative Suits To Shareholder Class Actions, Ángel Oquendo

Faculty Articles and Papers

Trans-individual litigation has revolutionized modern law. It has radically altered the manner of assertion and adjudication of legal claims. Beyond concerning a large number of people, the underlying suits operate in a unique fashion. In particular, they call for the constant protection of the interests of the parties on whose behalf the plaintiffs purport to speak. Not surprisingly, corporate law has partaken in this phenomenon. For instance, derivative suits allow individuals to sue for a larger collectivity, somewhat along the lines of the citizen suits established over a century later. Of course, they entertain the claims of the corporation, rather …

Understanding The Obstacles To The Recognition And Enforcement Of U.S. Judgments Abroad, Samuel P. Baumgartner

Akron Law Faculty Publications

Questions of recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments have entered center stage. Recent empirical work suggests that there has been a marked increase in the frequency with which U.S. courts are asked to recognize and enforce foreign judgments. The U.S. litigation surrounding a multibillion-dollar Ecuadoran judgment against Chevron indicates that the stakes in some of these cases can be high indeed. This rising importance of questions of judgments recognition has not been lost on lawmakers. In November of 2011, the Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law of the U.S. House of Representatives’ Judiciary Committee held hearings on whether to …

The Global Chase: Seeking The Recognition And Enforcement Of The Lago Agrio Judgment Outside Of Ecuador, Manuel A. Gómez

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Cross-Border Collective Redress And Individual Participatory Rights: Quo Vadis?, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

This article fills a critical gap in the commentary by undertaking a rights-based analysis of the various issues that arise in cases involving large-scale international litigation, focusing in particular on the Brussels I Regulation and what may be called ‘individual participatory rights’. In so doing, the discussion considers the nature and scope of individual participatory rights in collective litigation as well the ways in which these rights should be weighed and considered. Although the analysis is set in the context of European procedural law, this discussion is of equal relevance to parties outside the European Union, either because they will …

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 …

Stopped At The Starting Gate: The Overuse Of Summary Judgment In Equal Pay Cases, Deborah Thompson Eisenberg

Faculty Scholarship

Prepared for a symposium about the overuse of summary judgment in employment discrimination cases, this Article provides a grassroots empirical analysis of what is happening in equal pay cases on the front lines of the district courts. Analyzing a database of 500 federal district court decisions—both published and unpublished—that considered whether to grant summary judgment on an equal pay claim from 2000 to 2011, the review shows that dismissing equal pay claims at the summary judgment stage has become the modus operandi for most federal courts. Courts granted 68% of summary judgment motions in equal pay cases—meaning that only about …

Future Conduct And The Limits Of Class-Action Settlements, James Grimmelmann

Faculty Scholarship

This Article identifies a new and previously unrecognized trend in class-action settlements: releases for the defendant’s future conduct. Such releases, which hold the defendant harmless for wrongs it will commit in the future, are unusually dangerous to class members and to the public. Even more than the “future claims” familiar to class-action scholars, future-conduct releases pose severe informational problems for class members and for courts. Worse, they create moral hazard for the defendant, give it concentrated power, and thrust courts into a prospective planning role they are ill-equipped to handle.

Courts should guard against the dangers of future-conduct releases with …

When Bad Guys Are Wearing White Hats, Catherine A. Rogers

Journal Articles

Allegations of ethical misconduct by lawyers have all but completely overshadowed the substantive claims in the Chevron case. While both sides have been accused of flagrant wrongdoing, the charges against plaintiffs’ counsel appear to have captured more headlines and garnered more attention. The primary reason why the focus seems lopsided is that plaintiffs’ counsel were presumed to be the ones wearing white hats in this epic drama. This essay postulates that this seeming irony is not simply an example of personal ethical lapse, but in part tied to larger reasons why ethical violations are an occupational hazard for plaintiffs’ counsel …