Law Commons^™

I Like To Move It, Move It: Partialvenue Transfer For Less Than A Fulllegal Action, Krystal Brunner Swendsboe

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Proportionality, Pretrial Confidentiality, And Discovery Sharing, Dustin B. Benham

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

De Graça, Até Injeção Na Testa: Análise Juseconômica Da Gratuidade De Justiça, Ivo T. Gico Jr., Henrique A. Arake

Ivo Teixeira Gico Jr.

A gratuidade de justiça para os “juridicamente pobres” é um solução possível para garantir o livre acesso ao Judiciário. No entanto, concedida de forma irrestrita, a gratuidade pode induzir à litigância frívola. O presente artigo emprega a Análise Econômica do Direito para analisar a estrutura de incentivos dos agentes privados criada pela gratuidade de justiça e explora suas consequências sociais.

Is The Supreme Court Disabling The Enabling Act, Or Is Shady Grove Just Another Bad Opera?, Robert J. Condlin

Robert J. Condlin

After seventy years of trying, the Supreme Court has yet to agree on whether the Rules Enabling Act articulates a one or two part standard for determining the validity of a Federal Rule. Is it enough that a Federal Rule regulates “practice and procedure,” or must it also not “abridge substantive rights”? The Enabling Act seems to require both, but the Court is not so sure, and the costs of its uncertainty are real. Among other things, litigants must guess whether the decision to apply a Federal Rule in a given case will depend upon predictable ritual, judicial power grab, …

The Federal Rules At 75: Dispute Resolution, Private Enforcement Or Decisions According To Law?, James R. Maxeiner

Georgia State University Law Review

This essay is a critical response to the 2013 commemorations of the75th anniversary of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were introduced in 1938 to provide procedure to decide cases on their merits. The Rules were designed to replace decisions under the “sporting theory of justice”with decisions according to law.

By 1976, at midlife, it was clear that they were not achieving their goal. America’s proceduralists split into two sides about what to do. One side promotes rules that control and conclude litigation: e.g.,plausibility pleading, case management, limited discovery, cost indemnity for discovery, and summary …

Specificity Or Dismissal: The Improper Extension Of Rule 9(B) To Negligent Misrepresentation As A Deprivation Of Plaintiffs’ Procedural Due Process Rights, Julie A. Cook

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Waiving The Duty To Mitigate In Commercial Leases, Jacqueline Sandler

William & Mary Business Law Review

This Note examines a largely unexplored consequence of jurisdictions adopting a default duty to mitigate for commercial leases: whether a contract provision waiving the duty should be enforced. Only a few courts across the country have addressed the waiver issue in a commercial setting. At least two different appeals courts have enforced a waiver clause and claim that public policy supports their decision. In contrast, a federal court has stated the opposite—that public policy demands waiver provisions be void. Another state has outright voided all waiver clauses by statute. Courts that have enforced waivers have asserted that commercial parties have …

Recent Reforms In Eu Law: Recognition And Enforcement Of Judgments, Samuel P. Baumgartner

Akron Law Faculty Publications

The European Union has just adopted a set of amendments to the Brussels I Regulation, which governs jurisdiction to adjudicate, parallel proceedings, and the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. This article discusses the Regulation and the adopted amendments regarding the recognition and enforcement of judgments and argues that these amendments are part of a deeper set of structural and conceptual changes in the law of transnational litigation in the European Union over the last two decades. The article concludes with an analysis of both the amendments and the underlying changes for litigants and law reformers in the United States, …

Recent Reforms In Eu Law: Recognition And Enforcement Of Judgments, Samuel P. Baumgartner

Samuel P. Baumgartner

The European Union has just adopted a set of amendments to the Brussels I Regulation, which governs jurisdiction to adjudicate, parallel proceedings, and the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. This article discusses the Regulation and the adopted amendments regarding the recognition and enforcement of judgments and argues that these amendments are part of a deeper set of structural and conceptual changes in the law of transnational litigation in the European Union over the last two decades. The article concludes with an analysis of both the amendments and the underlying changes for litigants and law reformers in the United States, …

Aereo's Errors, Ira Steven Nathenson

Ira Steven Nathenson

This article scrutinizes the many troubling errors made by the United States Supreme Court in its decision in American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. v. Aereo, Inc. Aereo’s streaming television service allowed subscribers to watch broadcast television on a computer, tablet, or smartphone without requiring them to be directly connected to cable, satellite, or a local antenna. Aereo’s system was designed to comply with existing copyright law by using thousands of antennas, each of which was designated for only one subscriber at a time. Aereo was sued for copyright infringement by a number of leading television broadcasters. The United States Supreme Court, …

When The Mountain Goes To Mohammed: The Internet And Judicial Decision-Making, Layne S. Keele

Layne S. Keele

Judges increasingly are scouring the Internet in search of case-related facts, often without the parties’ knowledge. This article grapples with the question of what limits, if any, should circumscribe judicial Internet use. Drawing a distinction between online searches for adjudicative facts and online research into legislative facts, I argue that the former are always improper, while the propriety of the latter depends largely on one’s view of the role of the judiciary. In both cases, Internet research creates unique risks not found with other kinds of research, and this article offers some suggestions for alleviating those risks. This article also …

Splits In The Rock: The Conflicting Interpretations Of The Seminole Rock Deference Doctrine By The U.S. Courts Of Appeals, Kevin O. Leske

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Can The Dark Arts Of The Dismal Science Shed Light On The Empirical Reality Of Civil Procedure?, Jonah B. Gelbach

All Faculty Scholarship

Litigation involves human beings, who are likely to be motivated to pursue their interests as they understand them. Empirical civil procedure researchers must take this fact seriously if we are to adequately characterize the effects of policy changes. To make this point concrete, I first step outside the realm of civil procedure and illustrate the importance of accounting for human agency in empirical research. I use the canonical problem of demand estimation in economics to show how what I call the “urn approach” to empirical work fails to uncover important empirical relationships by disregarding behavioral aspects of human action. I …

Mapping Supreme Court Doctrine: Civil Pleading, Scott Dodson, Colin Starger

Scott Dodson

This essay, adapted from the video presentation available at http://vimeo.com/89845875, graphically depicts the genealogy and evolution of federal civil pleading standards in U.S. Supreme Court opinions over time. We show that the standard narrative—of a decline in pleading liberality from Conley to Twombly to Iqbal—is complicated by both progenitors and progeny. We therefore offer a fuller picture of the doctrine of Rule 8 pleading that ought to be of use to judges and practitioners in federal court. We also hope to introduce a new visual format for academic scholarship that capitalizes on the virtues of narration, graphics, mapping, online accessibility, …

Party Subordinance In Federal Litigation, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

American civil litigation in federal courts operates under a presumption of party dominance. Parties choose the lawsuit structure, factual predicates, and legal arguments, and the court accepts these choices. Further, parties enter ubiquitous ex ante agreements that purport to alter the law governing their dispute, along with a chorus of calls for even more party-driven customization of litigation. The assumption behind this model of party dominance is that parties substantially control both the law that will govern their dispute and the judges that oversee it. This Article challenges that assumption by offering a reoriented model of party subordinance. Under my …