Law Commons^™

Statutory Rape, Paul H. Robinson, Tyler Scot Williams

All Faculty Scholarship

It is common for criminal law scholars from outside the United States to discuss the “American rule” and compare it to the rule of other countries. As this volume makes clear, however, there is no such thing as an “American rule.” Because each of the states, plus the District of Columbia and the federal system, have their own criminal law, there are fifty-two American criminal codes.

American criminal law scholars know this, of course, but they too commonly speak of the “general rule” as if it reflects some consensus or near consensus position among the states. But the truth is …

Distributive Principles Of Criminal Law, Paul H. Robinson, Tyler Scot Williams

All Faculty Scholarship

This first chapter from the recently published book Mapping American Criminal Law: Variations across the 50 States documents the alternative distributive principles for criminal liability and punishment — desert, deterrence, incapacitation of the dangerous — that are officially recognized by law in each of the American states. The chapter contains two maps visually coded to display important differences: the first map shows which states have adopted desert, deterrence, or incapacitation as a distributive principle, while the second map shows which form of desert is adopted in those jurisdictions that recognize desert. Like all 38 chapters in the book, which covers …

Felony Murder, Paul H. Robinson, Tyler Scot Williams

All Faculty Scholarship

It is common for criminal law scholars from outside the United States to discuss the “American rule” and compare it to the rule of other countries. As this volume makes clear, however, there is no such thing as an “American rule.” Because each of the states, plus the District of Columbia and the federal system, have their own criminal law, there are fifty-two American criminal codes.

American criminal law scholars know this, of course, but they too commonly speak of the “general rule” as if it reflects some consensus or near consensus position among the states. But the truth is …

Insanity Defense, Paul H. Robinson, Tyler Scot Williams

All Faculty Scholarship

It is common for criminal law scholars from outside the United States to discuss the “American rule” and compare it to the rule of other countries. As this volume makes clear, however, there is no such thing as an “American rule.” Because each of the states, plus the District of Columbia and the federal system, have their own criminal law, there are fifty-two American criminal codes.

American criminal law scholars know this, of course, but they too commonly speak of the “general rule” as if it reflects some consensus or near consensus position among the states. But the truth is …

Contract And Property Law—Fee-Shifting Statutes And Landlord-Tenant Law—A Call For The Repeal Of The English Rule "Loser Pays" System Regarding Contract Disputes And Its Effect On Low-Income Arkansas Tenants, Stephanie Mantell

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Slides: The Era Of River Anthropology: Social And Eco-Hydrological Science Connections And Capacity For Environmental Flows: Us Case Studies, Joseph E. Flotemersch, Lisa-Perras Gordon

Coping with Water Scarcity in River Basins Worldwide: Lessons Learned from Shared Experiences (Martz Summer Conference, June 9-10)

Presenter: Joe Flotemersch, US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Research and Development

21 slides

Fee-Shifting Bylaw And Charter Provisions: Can They Apply In Federal Court? – The Case For Preemption, John C. Coffee Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

In the first months after a decision of the Delaware Supreme Court upholding a fee-shifting bylaw under which the unsuccessful plaintiff shareholder was required to reimburse all defendants for their legal and other expenses in the litigation, some 24 public companies adopted a similar provision – either by means of a board-adopted bylaw or by placing such a provision in their certificate of incorporation (in the case of companies undergoing an IPO). In effect, private ordering is introducing a one-sided version of the “loser pays” rules. Indeed, as drafted, these provisions typically require a plaintiff who is not completely successful …

No Duty To Rescue: Can Americans Really Leave A Victim Lying In The Street? What Is Left Of The American Rule, And Will It Survive Unabated?, Jennifer L. Groninger

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The American "Rule": Assuring The Lion His Share, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

Court costs in American civil procedure are allocated to the loser (“loser pays”) as elsewhere in the world. When American civil procedure took shape in the 1840s, American lawyers thought that losing parties ought to indemnify winning parties against all expenses of lawsuits. Yet today, attorneys’ fees – the lion’s share of expenses in the words of the General Report – are not allocated this way. By practice – and not by legal rule – attorneys’ fees fall on the parties that incur them. Those fees are not set by statute or court decision, but by agreement between parties and …

When Can Attorneys' Fees Be Recovered In An Award Enforcement Action, M. Anderson Berry, Katherine S. Ritchey, Nandini Iyer

M. Anderson Berry

Because parties do not always comply with arbitration awards, it may be necessary for the prevailing party to seek enforcement of the award in a court of law—typically in a jurisdiction where the losing party has sufficient assets. This article focuses on whether the prevailing party can recover attorneys’ fees accrued during the enforcement procedure in U.S. district court under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA).

Hardt V. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company: Attorney's Fee Awards Under Erisa And The "Some Degree Of Success" Standard, Matthew D. Gimovsky

Journal of Health Care Law and Policy

No abstract provided.

Cost And Fee Allocation In Civil Procedure, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

Court costs in American civil procedure are allocated to the loser ("loser pays") as elsewhere in the civilized world. As Theodor Sedgwick, America's first expert on damages opined, it is matter of inherent justice that the party found in the wrong should indemnify the party in the right for the expenses of litigation. Yet attorneys' fees are not allocated this way in the United States: they are allowed to fall on the party that incurs them (the ''American rule," better, the American practice). According to Albert Ehrenzweig, Austrian judge, emigre and then prominent American law professor, the American practice is …

Determining Whether Plaintiff Prevailed Is A "Close Question"—But Should It Be?, Nikolai G. Guerra

Seventh Circuit Review

According to the “American rule,” litigants must bear their own litigation costs, including attorneys’ fees, absent statutory authorization allowing otherwise. With the emergence of fee-shifting provisions in various statutes, particularly in the area of civil rights, a court may award a prevailing party its attorneys’ fees and other costs. Deciding whether a party prevailed for purposes of a fee-shifting statute, however, requires courts to engage in an analysis of the benefit the plaintiff has received from his judgment. Recently, in Karraker v. Rent-A-Center, the Seventh Circuit held that a plaintiff class prevailed for purposes of the American with Disabilities …

Zapata Retold: Attorneys' Fees Are (Still) Not Governed By The Cisg, Harry Flechtner, Joseph Lookofsky

Articles

In this work, the authors reiterate and expand on their conclusion that the question of reimbursement for attorney fees incurred in the course of litigating a claim under the United Nations Sales Convention (CISG) is beyond the scope of the CISG, and is governed by domestic law. As discussed in the paper, this conclusion is in line with a recent CISG Advisory Council Opinion (Advisory Council Opinion No. 6) dealing with the calculation of damages under Article 74 of the CISG. We argue that relegating to domestic law the question of recovering attorney fees incurred during litigation over a CISG …

Litigation Cost Allocation Rules And Compliance With The Negligence Standard, Keith N. Hylton

Faculty Scholarship

This article examines compliance, incentives to bring suit, and incentives to settle in a negligence regime under alternative litigation cost allocation rules. Four allocation rules are considered: the American rule, which requires each party to pay his own costs; the British rule, which requires the losing party to pay the winning party's costs in addition to his own; the prodefendant rule, which requires the defendant to pay only his own costs if he loses and nothing otherwise; and the proplaintiff rule, which requires the plaintiff to pay only his own costs if he loses and nothing otherwise.

Legal Systems For Allocating Groundwater And Controlling Its Extraction, Charles F. Wilkinson

Groundwater: Allocation, Development and Pollution (Summer Conference, June 6-9)

22 pages (includes illustration).

Contains research sources list (pages 1-2).

A Giant Step Backwards: Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. V. Wilderness Society' And Its Effect On Public Interest Litigation

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Corporations - Stockholder's Suit - Necessity Of Demand On Other Stockholders In Derivative Action, John C. Dowd

Michigan Law Review

In two related cases, a holder of common stock brought a derivative suit against the directors of his corporation claiming their illegal acts had deprived the corporation of assets. On defendants' motion to dismiss and for summary" judgment, held, judgment for the defendants. Plaintiff's failure to allege either that he had presented his claim to the stockholders at a stockholders' meeting or that a majority of the stockholders' votes were under the control of the directors defeated his action. Carroll v. New York, New Haven & Hartford R.; Glenmore v. Alpert, (D.C. Mass. 1956) 141 F. Supp. 456.