Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (13)
- Faculty Publications (3)
- Indiana Law Journal (3)
- Publications (2)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (2)
-
- All Faculty Scholarship (1)
- American Indian Law Review (1)
- Articles (1)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (1)
- Cleveland State Law Review (1)
- ExpressO (1)
- Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business (1)
- Touro Law Review (1)
- University of Richmond Law Review (1)
- Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law (1)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 34
Full-Text Articles in Law
Rule 4(K), Nationwide Personal Jurisdiction, And The Civil Rules Advisory Committee: Lessons From Attempted Reform, A. Benjamin Spencer
Rule 4(K), Nationwide Personal Jurisdiction, And The Civil Rules Advisory Committee: Lessons From Attempted Reform, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
On multiple occasions, I have advocated for a revision to Rule 4(k) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that would disconnect personal jurisdiction in federal courts from the jurisdictional limits of their respective host states—to no avail. In this Essay, I will review—one final time—my argument for nationwide personal jurisdiction in the federal courts, recount my (failed) attempt to persuade the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules to embrace my view, and reflect on what lessons may be drawn from the experience regarding the civil rulemaking process. My aim is to prompt discussion around potential rulemaking reforms and to equip …
The Territorial Reach Of Federal Courts, A. Benjamin Spencer
The Territorial Reach Of Federal Courts, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
Federal courts exercise the sovereign authority of the United States when they assert personal jurisdiction over a defendant. As components of the national sovereign, federal courts' maximum territorial reach is determined by the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause, which permits jurisdiction over persons with sufficient minimum contacts with the United States and over property located therein. Why, then, are federal courts limited to the territorial reach of the states in which they sit when they exercise personal jurisdiction in most cases? There is no constitutional or statutory mandate that so constrains the federal judicial reach. Rather, it is by operation …
Scott V. Harris And The Future Of Summary Judgment, Tobias Barrington Wolff
Scott V. Harris And The Future Of Summary Judgment, Tobias Barrington Wolff
All Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court’s decision in Scott v. Harris has quickly become a staple in many Civil Procedure courses, and small wonder. The cinematic high-speed car chase complete with dash-cam video and the Court’s controversial treatment of that video evidence seem tailor-made for classroom discussion. As is often true with instant classics, however, splashy first impressions can mask a more complex state of affairs. At the heart of Scott v. Harris lies the potential for a radical doctrinal reformation: a shift in the core summary judgment standard undertaken to justify a massive expansion of interlocutory appellate jurisdiction in qualified immunity cases. …
De-Frauding The System: Sham Plaintiffs And The Fraudulent Joinder Doctrine, Matthew C. Monahan
De-Frauding The System: Sham Plaintiffs And The Fraudulent Joinder Doctrine, Matthew C. Monahan
Michigan Law Review
Playing off the strict requirements of federal diversity jurisdiction, plaintiffs can structure their suits to prevent removal to federal court. A common way to preclude removability is to join a nondiverse party. Although plaintiffs have a great deal of flexibility, they may include only those parties that have a stake in the lawsuit. Put another way, a court will not permit a plaintiff to join a party to a lawsuit when that party is being joined solely to prevent removal. The most useful tool federal courts employ to prevent this form of jurisdictional manipulation is Federal Rule of Civil Procedure …
Ripple Effects: The Unintended Change To Jurisdictional Pleading Standards After Iqbal, James E. Von Der Heydt
Ripple Effects: The Unintended Change To Jurisdictional Pleading Standards After Iqbal, James E. Von Der Heydt
Cleveland State Law Review
This Note describes a little-observed ripple effect of the new pleading standard announced in Iqbal, the antiterrorism case whose holding swept broadly and changed the ground rules for considering allegations in so-called 12(b)(6) motions for all civil cases. This Note examines the interplay between the Twombly/Iqbal doctrine and federal courts’ practical approach to subject-matter jurisdiction. Part II describes the background jurisprudence on subject-matter jurisdiction, including the sharp line the Supreme Court has consistently re-drawn between claims lacking merit and those lacking jurisdictional basis, from Bell v. Hood through Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp. The consistent theme of this jurisprudence …
Rethinking Jurisdictional Discovery Under The Hague Evidence Convention, Kathleen B. Gilchrist
Rethinking Jurisdictional Discovery Under The Hague Evidence Convention, Kathleen B. Gilchrist
Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law
When a federal court in the United States compels the discovery of information located abroad to determine whether it has jurisdiction over the defendant, the court can apply the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Hague Evidence Convention. This Note argues that the approach taken by most courts--applying the balancing test formulated by the Supreme Court in Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. U.S. District Court and favoring application of the Federal Rules--is misguided. Courts should apply the Evidence Convention more often in jurisdictional discovery disputes. They can do so under the existing legal framework with one of three holdings: …
In Defense Of The Substance-Procedure Dichotomy, Jennifer S. Hendricks
In Defense Of The Substance-Procedure Dichotomy, Jennifer S. Hendricks
Publications
John Hart Ely famously observed, "We were all brought up on sophisticated talk about the fluidity of the line between substance and procedure," but for most of Erie's history, the Supreme Court has answered the question "Does this state law govern in federal court? " with a "yes" or a "no." Beginning, however, with Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, and continuing with Semtek v. Lockheed Martin and the dissenting opinion in Shady Grove v. Allstate, a shifting coalition of justices has pursued a third path. Instead of declaring state law applicable or inapplicable, they have claimed for …
Jurisdictional Discovery In United States Federal Courts, S. I. Strong
Jurisdictional Discovery In United States Federal Courts, S. I. Strong
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Nationwide Personal Jurisdiction For Our Federal Courts, A. Benjamin Spencer
Nationwide Personal Jurisdiction For Our Federal Courts, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure limits the territorial jurisdiction of federal district courts to that of the courts of their host states.T his limitation is a voluntary rather than obligatory restriction, given district courts' status as courts of the national sovereign. Although there are sound policy reasons for limiting the jurisdictional reach of our federal courts in this manner, the limitation delivers little benefit from a judicial administration or even a fairness perspective, and ultimately costs more to implement than is gained in return. The rule should be amended to provide that district courts have personal …
Enforcing Foreign Summary/Default Judgments: The Damoclean Sword Hanging Over Pro Se Canadian Corporate Defendants? Case Comment On U.S.A. V. Shield Development, Antonin I. Pribetic
Enforcing Foreign Summary/Default Judgments: The Damoclean Sword Hanging Over Pro Se Canadian Corporate Defendants? Case Comment On U.S.A. V. Shield Development, Antonin I. Pribetic
ExpressO
Following the 2003 Supreme Court of Canada decision in Beals v. Saldanha, where the “real and substantial connection” test is otherwise met (i.e. consent-based jurisdiction, presence-based jurisdiction or assumed jurisdiction) the only available defences to a domestic defendant seeking to have a Canadian court refuse enforcement of a foreign judgment are fraud, public policy and natural justice. The 2005 Ontario decision in United States of America v. Shield Development Co., presents an opportunity to critically analyze the defence of natural justice through a juxtaposition of American and Canadian procedural law. The thesis is that procedural justice mandates that “form follow …
Procedural And Substantive Problems In Complex Litigation Arising From Disasters, Jack B. Weinstein
Procedural And Substantive Problems In Complex Litigation Arising From Disasters, Jack B. Weinstein
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Federal Court Across The Street: Constitutional Limits On Federal Court Assertions Of Personal Jurisdiction, Pamela J. Stephens
The Federal Court Across The Street: Constitutional Limits On Federal Court Assertions Of Personal Jurisdiction, Pamela J. Stephens
University of Richmond Law Review
Twenty years ago, in a clear break with accepted theory, it was suggested that there were certain constitutional limitations on a federal court's authority to exercise personal jurisdiction. Such a departure from the traditional view might be expected to prompt an extensive examination of that issue by commentators. However, while assertions of personal jurisdiction by state courts have been the subject of intense scrutiny and ongoing constitutional refinements, this has not been the case regarding assertions of personal jurisdiction by federal courts. Generally, federal district courts sitting in diversity cases must look to personal jurisdiction limitations inherent in the state …
Equity And Amiralty: A Turbulet Path To Manifest Destiny, George P. Ii Smith
Equity And Amiralty: A Turbulet Path To Manifest Destiny, George P. Ii Smith
Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business
Effective in 1966, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were amended "to effect unification of the civil and admiralty procedure." With this amendement, the Advisory Committee intended that, "just as the 1938 rules abolished the distinction between actions at law and suits in equity, this change would abolish the distinction between civil actions and suits in admiralty." Thus, rule 1, defining the scope of the rules, now states, "These rules govern the procedure in the United States district courts in all suits of a civil nature whether cognizable as cases as law or in equity or in admiralty... They shall …
Dial V. Navajo-Hopi Relocation Commission: Relocation Benefits
Dial V. Navajo-Hopi Relocation Commission: Relocation Benefits
American Indian Law Review
No abstract provided.
Ancillary Jurisdiction And Intervention Under Federal Rule 24: Analysis And Proposals, Jeffrey L. Rensberger
Ancillary Jurisdiction And Intervention Under Federal Rule 24: Analysis And Proposals, Jeffrey L. Rensberger
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Personal Jurisdiction And Rule 23 Defendant Class Actions, John M. Rogers
Personal Jurisdiction And Rule 23 Defendant Class Actions, John M. Rogers
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Rule 14(A) And Ancillary Jurisdiction: Plaintiff's Claim Against Non-Diverse Third-Party Defendant
Rule 14(A) And Ancillary Jurisdiction: Plaintiff's Claim Against Non-Diverse Third-Party Defendant
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Consumer Class Action, Arthur H. Travers Jr., Jonathan M. Landers
The Consumer Class Action, Arthur H. Travers Jr., Jonathan M. Landers
Publications
No abstract provided.
Contempt-Injunctions-Federal Civil Contempt Decree Orders Deputy Sheriff To Resign From Office-Lance V. Plummer, Michigan Law Review
Contempt-Injunctions-Federal Civil Contempt Decree Orders Deputy Sheriff To Resign From Office-Lance V. Plummer, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
During the summer of 1964, a federal district judge issued an injunction prohibiting various St. Augustine, Florida organizations and other persons with notice of the injunction from harassing or intimidating Negroes who were seeking motel or restaurant accommodations. Appellant Lance, an unpaid volunteer deputy sheriff, was not a member of any of the enjoined organizations, but he had actual notice of the order. Nonetheless, six days after the injunction was issued, he engaged in activities designed to intimidate a Negro citizen. In a subsequent civil contempt action arising from these activities, the federal district judge, asserting jurisdiction over him because …
Determination Of Federal Jurisdictional Amount In Suits On Unliquidated Claims, Michigan Law Review
Determination Of Federal Jurisdictional Amount In Suits On Unliquidated Claims, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Hoping to keep federal court dockets free of petty claims and thereby to reduce the delay in bringing to trial controversies involving more substantial sums, Congress has given United States district courts jurisdiction of many civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States and most disputes between parties of diverse citizenship only when the alleged right forming the basis of a claimant's cause of action can be valued at more than ten thousand dollars. The value of a particular claim is determined by reference to those portions of its proponent's pleading which tend to support …
Service Of Process-Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure-Service Of Process In Italy On Alien Corporate Defendant Permitted In A Federal Antitrust Action-Hoffman Motors Corp. V. Alfa Romeo S.P.A.., Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff, an American automobile distributor, brought suit in a federal court in the Southern District of New York against Alfa Romeo S.p.A., an Italian corporation, for violation of the Robinson- Patman and Auto Dealers' Acts. Service of process was made personally on defendant's general manager in Italy by an Italian attorney appointed for that purpose by the district court, and by registered mail as prescribed by the New York statute for extraterritorial service. Defendant moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction as to the Robinson-Patman claim on the ground that section 12 of the Clayton Act limits the territorial …
Revitalization Of The International Judicial Assistance Procedures Of The United States: Service Of Documents And Takings Of Testimony, Richard F. Gerber
Revitalization Of The International Judicial Assistance Procedures Of The United States: Service Of Documents And Takings Of Testimony, Richard F. Gerber
Michigan Law Review
This comment will examine two aspects of such judicial assistance-service. of documents and taking of testimony-and it will analyze each from the viewpoint of assistance obtained abroad in aid of American litigation as well as assistance rendered within the United States in aid of foreign litigation. It will attempt to survey some of the problems involved in securing performance of these acts, indicate the changes in current practice which are likely to result from the revisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the proposed amendments to the Judicial Code, and, last, suggest some additional measures which might promote …
The New Michigan Pre-Trial Procedural Rules-Models For Other States?, Robert Meisenholder
The New Michigan Pre-Trial Procedural Rules-Models For Other States?, Robert Meisenholder
Michigan Law Review
The new Michigan procedural laws are embodied in a revised set of statutes and court rules which became effective January 1, 1963, after a long period of study by a Joint Committee on Michigan Procedural Revision. They abolish an anachronistic distinction between procedures in law and equity, abrogate a scattered, disorganized set of rules and statutes, and create a unified, coherent procedural system.
The Modern Utility Of Quasi In Rem Jurisdiction, Paul D. Carrington
The Modern Utility Of Quasi In Rem Jurisdiction, Paul D. Carrington
Articles by Maurer Faculty
Professor Carrington examines the proposed amendment to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that would confer quasi in rem jurisdiction on the federal courts and concludes that it should be rejected. Arguing that the expansion of the concept of personal jurisdiction has removed most of what justification there once was for quasi in rem jurisdiction, the author maintains that the latter jurisdiction often provides only limited and uncertain judgments for local plaintiffs while compelling nonresident defendants to litigate in an inconvenient forum, and herefore should not be made available in the federal courts merely to bring their practice into conformity …
Bankruptcy - Summary Jurisdiction - Filing Proof Of Claim As Basis For Money Judgment On A Counterclaim In Favor Of The Trustee, Jerome M. Salle S. Ed
Bankruptcy - Summary Jurisdiction - Filing Proof Of Claim As Basis For Money Judgment On A Counterclaim In Favor Of The Trustee, Jerome M. Salle S. Ed
Michigan Law Review
Appellant filed a proof of claim with the trustee in bankruptcy for unliquidated damages for an alleged breach of contract by the bankrupt. In response, the trustee filed a petition with the bankruptcy court for an order disallowing the appellant's claim and for a money judgment against appellant for a breach of the same contract. The district court affirmed the referee's denial of appellant's claim and judgment in favor of the trustee. On appeal, held, affirmed. Filing proof of claim gives the bankruptcy court jurisdiction not only to hear, but to grant the trustee's petition for affirmative relief on …
Attachment And Garnishment In The Federal Courts, Brainerd Currie
Attachment And Garnishment In The Federal Courts, Brainerd Currie
Michigan Law Review
Personal injuries allegedly caused by the negligent manufacture of safety fuses used in blasting operations in a coal mine were suffered by Raymond Davis, apparently a citizen of Arkansas. The manufacturer, Ensign-Bickford Company, was a Connecticut corporation that could not be personally served with process within Arkansas. But it happened that two foreign corporations, amenable to process in the state, were indebted in substantial amounts to Ensign-Bickford Company. Accordingly, counsel for Davis, invoking the diversity jurisdiction, filed an action in the District Court for the Western District of Arkansas. Without issue of summons, the plaintiff, in conformity with Arkansas statutes, …
Compulsory Joinder Of Parties In Civil Actions, John W. Reed
Compulsory Joinder Of Parties In Civil Actions, John W. Reed
Michigan Law Review
Compulsory joinder cases involving interests in land display one peculiar and important characteristic: there is almost never any need in the state courts to wrestle with the question of whether a person is indispensable as distinguished from necessary. One hastens to add that this attribute of land cases appears to have gone largely unnoticed, but it exists none the less. It arises out of the fact that in a suit involving real property it is never impossible for the court to obtain jurisdiction over all persons interested therein to an extent which will enable the court to adjudicate controversies over …
Compulsory Joinder Of Parties In Civil Actions, John W. Reed
Compulsory Joinder Of Parties In Civil Actions, John W. Reed
Articles
The plaintiff in a civil cause ordinarily is permitted to select the persons with whom he will litigate. The initial designation of parties to an action is made by the plaintiff, and if he chooses to sue B and not A,' that is ordinarily of no concern to B or to A or to the court. So also where the plaintiff without A as co-plaintiff sues B. Not always, however, is the plaintiff permitted unfettered choice in naming the parties to his lawsuit. On the one hand there are persons whose relationship to the situation in litigation is outside the …
Federal Procedure - Jurisdiction - Appeal From Judgment On Some Of Several Multiple Claims Under Rule 54(B), Lawrence N. Ravick S.Ed.
Federal Procedure - Jurisdiction - Appeal From Judgment On Some Of Several Multiple Claims Under Rule 54(B), Lawrence N. Ravick S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff filed a complaint in a federal district court alleging in six counts that defendant was engaged in unfair competition against business ventures carried on by the plaintiff. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. The court ordered two counts to be stricken, found that there was no just reason for delaying the final determination of the issues raised by these counts, and directed that judgment be entered thereon against the plaintiff. The plaintiff appealed and the defendant moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the order and judgment appealed from was not a final or …
Suits Against Unincorporated Associations Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, John Kaplan
Suits Against Unincorporated Associations Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, John Kaplan
Michigan Law Review
Concepts, Benjamin Cardozo has said, "are useful, indeed indispensable, if kept within their place. We will press them quite a distance. . . . A time comes, however, when the concepts carry us too far, or farther than we are ready to go with them, and behold, some other concept, with capacity to serve our needs is waiting at the gate. 'It is a peculiar virtue of our system of law that the process of inclusion and exclusion, so often employed in developing a rule, is not allowed to end with its enunciation, and that an expression in an opinion …