Law Commons^™

Brief For Respondent. United States V. Wong, 134 S.Ct. 2873 (2014) (No. 13-1074), 2014 Wl 5804278, Eric Schnapper, Tom Steenson, Beth Creighton, Michael Rose

Court Briefs

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

1. Is the six-month limit on filing suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 2401(b), jurisdictional?

2. If the six-month limit for filing suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 2401(b), is not jurisdictional, is it subject to equitable tolling?

Solving Jurisdiction's Social Cost, Dustin E. Buehler

Washington Law Review

Federal court subject-matter jurisdiction rules incur a significant social cost—when jurisdiction is found lacking, courts must dismiss, no matter how many years and resources the parties have spent on the case. Indeed, hundreds of belated jurisdictional dismissals occur each year after parties have already engaged in discovery, dispositive motions, or even trial. Federal judges tolerate this waste largely because they view nonwaivable jurisdictional rules as a function of structural values rooted in the Constitution, rather than efficiency concerns. In contrast, scholars tend to focus primarily on efficiency arguments while discussing jurisdictional nonwaivability, de-emphasizing important structural interests. Both theories are overly …

The Claim-Centered Approach To Arising-Under Jurisdiction: A Brief Rejoinder To Professor Mulligan, Simona Grossi

Washington Law Review

My claim-centered approach to arising-under jurisdiction fully embraces the three subcategories of jurisdiction that Professor Mulligan identifies. My essential point is that the bifurcation (or trifurcation as Professor Mulligan suggests) into separate doctrines has led to a mechanical jurisprudence that is sometimes inconsistent with the fundamental principles that ought to animate § 1331 jurisdictional analysis. In my view, Gully v. First National Bank illuminates those fundamental principles by focusing on the role of the federal issue in the case before the court. That does not mean that Gully provides an easy answer for all applications of arising-under jurisdiction; it does …

Gully And The Failure To Stake A 28 U.S.C. § 1331 "Claim", Lumen N. Mulligan

Washington Law Review

In this piece, I argue that a return to Gully v. First National Bank in Meridian as an approach to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 jurisdiction is ill-conceived. In a recent thoughtful article, Professor Simona Grossi draws heavily upon the traditions of the legal process school’s approach to federal courts jurisprudence to support just such a resurrection of Gully as the lodestar for § 1331 doctrine. While embracing a return to the legal process school, I argue first that the Gully view—read as a call for judges simply to select sufficiently important matters, in relation to plaintiff’s case in chief, for …

Gully And The Failure To Stake A 28 U.S.C. § 1331 "Claim", Lumen N. Mulligan

Washington Law Review

In this piece, I argue that a return to Gully v. First National Bank in Meridian as an approach to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 jurisdiction is ill-conceived. In a recent thoughtful article, Professor Simona Grossi draws heavily upon the traditions of the legal process school’s approach to federal courts jurisprudence to support just such a resurrection of Gully as the lodestar for § 1331 doctrine. While embracing a return to the legal process school, I argue first that the Gully view—read as a call for judges simply to select sufficiently important matters, in relation to plaintiff’s case in chief, for …

The Claim-Centered Approach To Arising-Under Jurisdiction: A Brief Rejoinder To Professor Mulligan, Simona Grossi

Washington Law Review

My claim-centered approach to arising-under jurisdiction fully embraces the three subcategories of jurisdiction that Professor Mulligan identifies. My essential point is that the bifurcation (or trifurcation as Professor Mulligan suggests) into separate doctrines has led to a mechanical jurisprudence that is sometimes inconsistent with the fundamental principles that ought to animate § 1331 jurisdictional analysis. In my view, Gully v. First National Bank illuminates those fundamental principles by focusing on the role of the federal issue in the case before the court. That does not mean that Gully provides an easy answer for all applications of arising-under jurisdiction; it does …

An Economic Analysis Of Subject Matter Jurisdiction Waiver: A Response To Professor Buehler, Daniel Klerman

Washington Law Review Online

This article is a response to Dustin E. Buehler, Solving Jurisdiction's Social Cost, 89 Wash. L. Rev. 653 (2014).