Law Commons^™

The Movement Toward Early Case Handling In Courts And Private Dispute Resolution, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

This article identifies early case handling (ECH) as an important general phenomenon in dispute system design theory and practice, catalogs the major ECH processes, and urges practitioners and policymakers to encourage use of and experimentation with ECH processes when appropriate.The key element of ECH is that people intentionally exercise responsibility for handling the case from the outset. ECH processes in courts include early case management procedures, differentiated case management systems, early neutral evaluation, and other early alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes. ECH in the private sector includes ADR pledges and contract clauses, early case assessment and ADR screening protocols, settlement …

The Challenge Of Comparative Civil Procedure, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

This Essay reviews Civil Litigation in Comparative Context (West 2007), by Oscar G. Chase, Helen Hershkoff, Linda Silberman, Yasuhei Taniguchi, Vincenzo Varano, and Adrian Zuckerman. It also identifies some areas of exceptionalist American civil procedure that recently have been converging towards global norms and argues that those convergences, if they continue, could render comparative studies particularly meaningful.

The Many Meanings Of "Politics" In Judicial Decision Making, Bradley W. Joondeph

Faculty Publications

This essay seeks to untangle the many possible meanings of "politics" in descriptions of judicial behavior. Part I sets out ten possible conceptions of the term, briefly discussing some examples and their empirical foundations. My goal is mostly descriptive (rather than normative), though it is apparent that some conceptions are more useful than others. In all events, claims about the political influences on judicial behavior must be specific about the phenomena they seek to describe. For given the many possible meanings of politics, accounts that lack such specificity are largely vacuous.

Part II builds on this discussion to make two …

Health Courts?, Philip G. Peters Jr.

Faculty Publications

This article undertakes the first detailed critique of the proposal from Common Good and the Harvard School of Public Health to replace medical malpractice jury trials with adjudication before specialized health courts. Professor Peters concludes that the modest benefits likely to be produced by the current health court proposal are matched by the risks of bias and overreaching that these courts would also present. Missing from the plan is the doctrinal change mostly likely to improve patient safety - hospital enterprise liability. Without enterprise liability, the health court proposal is unlikely to achieve its patient safety goals and, as a …