Law Commons^™

(Mis)Judging Intent: The Fundamental Attribution Error In Federal Securities Law, Victor D. Quintanilla

Victor D. Quintanilla

This article examines the element of scienter (fraudulent intent) in claims of federal securities fraud under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and, more specifically, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd., 551 U.S. 308 (2007) from a social-psychological perspective. The field of social psychology has documented a pervasive phenomena—the Fundamental Attribution Error—the failure of decision-makers to consider situational explanations, including the force of environments and social and situational norms on human conduct. In light of robust social-psychological research on the Fundamental Attribution Error, legal concepts such as intent, intentionality, mens rea, and …

Civil Procedure, Jack H. Friedenthal

Cal Law Trends and Developments

One of the more important recent developments in California procedural law is the enactment of an entirely new set of provisions dealing with personal jurisdiction and service of process. The new procedure is effective July 1, 1970, and will alter substantially a number of current practices.

The Curse Of Bigness And The Optimal Size Of Class Actions, Alexandra Lahav

Alexandra D. Lahav

How big is too big when it comes to class actions? This short essay, written for the Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc roundtable on Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. examines that question. Size in itself should not be a barrier to certification, but courts may rightly be concerned with variation within the class. Variation causes manageability problems, but in some cases (like Dukes) variation can be managed within the class context by judicious use of statistical methods. I also demonstrate why the related argument that this class ought not be certified because it is too big and Wal-Mart will be …

Iqbal, Twombly, And The Lessons Of The Celotex Trilogy, Hillel Y. Levin

Scholarly Works

This Essay compares the Twombly/Iqbal line of cases to the Celotex trilogy and suggests that developments since the latter offer lessons for the former. Some of the comparisons are obvious: decreased access and increased judicial discretion. However, one important similarity has not been well understood: that the driving force in both contexts has been the lower courts rather than the Supreme Court. Further, while we can expect additional access barriers to be erected in the future, our focus should be on lower courts, rather than other institutional players, as the likely source of those barriers.

Some Questions About Interpretation, Ecto-Ambiguity, Tradition, And Conflicts Of Law And Fact, Graydon S. Staring

Graydon S. Staring

Questions raised by the interpretation of a conrtract clause with the aid of the following devices: Recognizing a more restrictive "traditional" understanding; Finding contract ambiguity between actual wording and traditional understanding; Resolving its intent by the canon contra proferentem; Accepting the finding of intent as controlling foreign state law

Best Of The Supremes - A Review Of The U.S. Supreme Court Term 2009-2010, Miller W. Shealy Jr.

Miller W. Shealy Jr.

No abstract provided.

Discoverability Of Private Investigator Surveillance In South Carolina: Navigating The Work Product Doctrine Under Samples V. Mitchell, Bradford J. Gower

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

Should A Scintilla Be Enough - The Proper Standard For Summary Judgment In South Carolina, Aaron J. Hayes

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

Exceptional Circumstances: Texas Mandamus Moves Into A Bleak House, Timothy D. Martin

Timothy D Martin

No abstract provided.

Ashcroft V. Iqbal And Pleading In Federal Drug And Device Cases, William Janssen

William M. Janssen

No abstract provided.

Pleading And Access To Civil Procedure: Historical And Comparative Reflections On Iqbal, A Day In Court And A Decision According To Law, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

The Iqbal decision confirms the breakdown of contemporary American civil procedure. We know what civil procedure should do, and we know that our civil procedure is not doing it. Civil procedure should facilitate determining rights according to law. It should help courts and parties apply law to facts accurately, fairly, expeditiously and efficiently. This article reflects on three historic American system failures and reports a foreign success story.

Pleadings can help courts do what we know courts should do: decide case on the merits, accurately, fairly, expeditiously and efficiently. Pleadings facilitate a day in court when focused on deciding according …

Trivia From The Supreme Court Order List, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

The Restrictive Ethos In Civil Procedure, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Those of us who study civil procedure are familiar with the notion that federal civil procedure under the 1938 Rules was generally characterized by a "liberal ethos," meaning that it was originally designed to promote open access to the courts and to facilitate a resolution of disputes on the merits. Most of us are also aware of the fact that the reality of procedure is not always access-promoting or fixated on merits- based resolutions as a priority. Indeed, I would say that a "restrictive ethos" prevails in procedure today, with many rules being developed, interpreted, and applied in a manner …

Civil Procedure Reform In Switzerland And The Role Of Legal Transplants, Samuel P. Baumgartner

Akron Law Faculty Publications

On January 1, 2011, Swiss courts will begin operating under a unified federal code of civil procedure for the first time in the country’s history. This code has been exceedingly long in the making. In this chapter, I use the new code and its history to engage the editors’ claim that the old categories of common law and civil law procedure are crumbling, thus making differences among countries within the common law or civil law world more important than differences across the divide.

First, the new Swiss code of civil procedure includes a number of features that may look like …

Civil Procedure Reform In Switzerland And The Role Of Legal Transplants, Samuel P. Baumgartner

Samuel P. Baumgartner

On January 1, 2011, Swiss courts will begin operating under a unified federal code of civil procedure for the first time in the country’s history. This code has been exceedingly long in the making. In this chapter, I use the new code and its history to engage the editors’ claim that the old categories of common law and civil law procedure are crumbling, thus making differences among countries within the common law or civil law world more important than differences across the divide.

First, the new Swiss code of civil procedure includes a number of features that may look like …

Civil Procedures For A World Of Shared And User-Generated Content, Ira Nathenson

Ira Steven Nathenson

Scholars often focus on the substance of copyrights as opposed to the procedures used to enforce them. Yet copyright enforcement procedures are at the root of significant overreach and deserve greater attention in academic literature. This Article explores three types of private enforcement procedures: direct enforcement (cease-and-desist practice); indirect enforcement (DMCA takedowns); and automated enforcement (YouTube’s Content ID filtering program). Such procedures can produce a “substance-procedure-substance” feedback loop that causes significant de facto overextensions of copyrights, particularly against those creating and sharing User-Generated Content (UGC). To avoid this feedback, the Article proposes descriptive and normative frameworks aimed towards the creation …

Texas Civil Procedure—The Texas Supreme Court Expands Mandamus Review For Rulings On Motions For New Trial, Timothy D. Martin

Timothy D Martin

No abstract provided.

Pearson, Iqbal, And Procedural Judicial Activism, Goutam U. Jois

Goutam U Jois

In its most recent term, the Supreme Court decided Pearson v. Callahan and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, two cases that, even at this early date, can safely be called “game-changers.” What is fairly well known is that Iqbal and Pearson, on their own terms, will hurt civil rights plaintiffs. A point that has not been explored is how the interaction between Iqbal and Pearson will also hurt civil rights plaintiffs. First, the cases threaten to catch plaintiffs on the horns of a dilemma: Iqbal says, in effect, that greater detail is required to get allegations past the motion to dismiss stage. …

Iqbal And The Slide Toward Restrictive Procedure, A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

Last term, in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the Supreme Court affirmed its commitment to more stringent pleading standards in the ordinary federal civil case. Although the decision is not a watershed, since it merely underscores the substantial changes to pleading doctrine wrought in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, Iqbal is disconcerting for at least two reasons. First, the Court treated Iqbal’s factual allegations in a manner that further erodes the assumption-of-truth rule that has been the cornerstone of modern federal civil pleading practice. The result is an approach to pleading that is governed by a subjective, malleable standard that permits judges …

Comparative Convergences In Pleading Standards, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

Comparative civil procedure has had little influence in American jurisprudence and commentary, in part because of American procedure's deep and widespread exceptionalism. But this may be changing, at least in certain areas. The American notice pleading standard, for example, which has long been considered exceptional, shows signs of trending toward the fact pleading models of foreign countries. Congressional experimentation with heightened pleading in statutes such as the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act and the Supreme Court's recent pronouncements in Iqbal v. Ashcroft and Bell Atlantic v. Twombly suggest that American pleading jurisprudence is moving away from its traditionally exceptionalist corner …

'Canada' In Electronic Evidence, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Canada is a bilingual and bi-jurisdictional country. Most provinces and territories are mainly English speaking and have common law as the basis for their legal system. The exception is the province of Quebec which is governed by civil law and where the majority speaks French. However, it must be noted that Quebec civil law has been substantially affected by common law, in particular with respect to discovery rules. The latter are closer to common law discovery rules than they are from, for instance, French civil law. Another important factor for the review of the management of digital evidence in Canada …

Saving Civil Justice: Judging Civil Justice, Elizabeth G. Thornburg

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

No abstract provided.

Zoya's Standing Problem, Or, When Should The Constitution Follow The Flag?, Jeffrey D. Kahn

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Some federal courts have devised a new test of prudential standing that they use to dismiss suits filed by foreign plaintiffs alleging unlawful conduct by American officials abroad, even when these cases involve matters that may have nothing to do with foreign affairs, national security, or terrorism. Rather than decide the case on its merits or dismiss it on any number of legitimate grounds, the complaint is dismissed because the plaintiff lacks a “prior substantial connection” to the United States.

I identify and critique this strange but proliferating test of standing. First, it is inconsistent with any theoretical view of …

A Wise Man Of The Law, Anthony J. Scirica

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Rough Justice, Alexandra Lahav

Alexandra D. Lahav

This Essay offers a new justification for rough justice. Rough justice, as I use the term here, is the attempt to resolve large numbers of cases by using statistical methods to give plaintiffs a justifiable amount of recovery. It replaces the trial, which most consider the ideal process for assigning value to cases. Ordinarily rough justice is justified on utilitarian grounds. But rough justice is not only efficient, it is also fair. In fact, even though individual litigation is often held out as the sine qua non of process, rough justice does a better job at obtaining fair results for …

It's All About The People: Creating A "Community Of Memory" In Civil Procedure Ii, Part One, Jennifer E. Spreng

Jennifer E Spreng

In Fall 2008, a nascent classroom community emerged among my Civil Procedure students, teaching assistants and I. That term’s adventure eventually became the vital “past” for the fully formed community that would knit students of future classes together as one.

The genesis of this early classroom community was my ideal of “the good lawyer” as the small-firm or small-jurisdiction practitioner I had known as a seven-year solo practitioner in a town of 50,000 people. That ideal was a combination of “the rhythms of the law” that run throughout the specialties; a more respectful and less stratified model of professionalism, and …

O'Connell V. Chapman Univ., No. 10-810, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

No abstract provided.

Justice Souter And The Civil Rules, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

Justice Souter’s recent retirement from the Court after nearly twenty years presents a unique opportunity to comment on his legacy. No doubt others will eulogize or castigate him for his membership in the Planned Parenthood v. Casey troika, but there is much more to the man and his jurisprudence. Indeed, the danger is that Justice Souter will be pigeonholed into one opinion, an opinion that he wrote early in his Supreme Court career, to the detriment of understanding the complex justice that he was. This short essay therefore analyzes a unique set of opinions—those that he authored on the federal …

New Pleading, New Discovery, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

Pleading in federal court has a new narrative. The old narrative was one of notice, with the goal of broad access to the civil justice system. New Pleading, after the landmark Supreme Court cases of Twombly and Iqbal, is focused on factual sufficiency, with the purpose of screening out meritless cases that otherwise might impose discovery costs on defendants. The problem with New Pleading is that factual sufficiency often is a poor proxy for meritlessness. Some plaintiffs lack sufficient factual knowledge of the elements of their claims not because the claims lack merit but because the information they need is …

Comparative Convergences In Pleading Standards, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

Comparative civil procedure has had little influence in American jurisprudence and commentary, in part because of American procedure’s deep and widespread exceptionalism. But this may be changing, at least in certain areas. The American notice pleading standard, for example, which has long been considered exceptional, shows signs of trending toward the fact pleading models of foreign countries. Congressional experimentation with heightened pleading in statutes such as the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act and the Supreme Court’s recent pronouncement in Bell Atlantic v. Twombly suggest that American pleading jurisprudence is moving away from its traditionally exceptionalist corner and towards a regime …