Law Commons^™

Can Speech Act Theory Save Notice Pleading?, Susan E. Provenzano

Indiana Law Journal

Countless scholars have debated—and lower courts have attempted to apply—the plausibility pleading regime that the Supreme Court introduced in Twombly and Iqbal. Iqbal took Twombly’s requirement that a complaint plead plausibly and turned it into a two-step test. Under that test, the life or death of a lawsuit rests on the distinction between “well-pleaded” and “conclusory” allegations. Only the former are assumed true on a motion to dismiss. Seven decades of pleading precedent had taken a sensible, if unstable, approach to the truth assumption, making a single cut between factual contentions (assumed true) and legal conclusions (ignored). But Iqbal redrew …

The Federalism Challenges Of Protecting Medical Privacy In Workers' Compensation, Ani B. Satz

Indiana Law Journal

Under current law, injured workers face a Hobson’s choice: They may file for workers’ compensation or maintain their medical privacy. The reason for this is that § 164.512(l) of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act’s Privacy Rule (HPR) is widely misinterpreted by courts and legislatures as a wholesale waiver of privacy protections for injured workers. Section 164.512(l) excludes workers’ compensation from federal privacy protections that may frustrate the efficient administration of workers’ compensation claims. As the history and intent behind the HPR indicate, § 164.512(l) is premised on the assumption that states will protect workers’ privacy by creating and …

Is The Antidiscrimination Project Being Ended?, Michael J. Zimmer

Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality

No abstract provided.

Mandatory Disclosure Can Improve The Discovery System, Angela R. Lang

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The 1993 Revision Of Federal Rule 11, Carl Tobias

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Fractured Procedure: The Civil Justice Reform Act Of 1990, Lauren K. Robel

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Federal district courts have viewed the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 as a mandate to adopt procedural rules inconsistent with existing law. But in this article, Professor Robel argues that the Act neither compels nor authorizes such local deviations. Citing examples from reforms underway in district courts nationwide, Professor Robel contends that courts' assertions of broad rulemaking authority rest on a misreading of the Act and of the compromise between Congress and the judiciary that led to its passage. Professor Robel cautions that the goal of national uniformity underlying the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure should not be compromised …

Mandatory Disclosure And Local Abrogation: In Search Of A Theory For Optional Rules, Lauren K. Robel

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Eighteen Feet Of Clay: Thoughts On Phantom Rule 4(M), Gene R. Shreve

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Understanding Civil Procedure, By Gene R. Shreve And Peter Raven-Hansen, William M. Richman

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

"Inherent Power" And Rule 16, How Far Can A Federal Court Push The Litigant Toward Settlement?, David A. Rammelt

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Class Actions And Duplicative Litigation, Edward F. Sherman

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Rethinking The Class Action: A Policy Primer On Reform, John C. Coffee Jr.

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Rule 4: Service By Mail May Cost You More Than A Stamp, Ann Varnon Crowley

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Use Of Discovery Sanctions In Administrative Agency Adjudication, Richard T. Frije

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Class Actions: Judicial Control Of Defense Communication With Absent Class Members, Donald D. Levenhagen

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Ancillary Jurisdiction And Intervention Under Federal Rule 24: Analysis And Proposals, Jeffrey L. Rensberger

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Conflict And Dissent In Class Actions: A Suggested Perspective, Bryant G. Garth

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Personal Jurisdiction And Rule 23 Defendant Class Actions, John M. Rogers

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Organizational Representation Suits: Labor Unions May Attack Employment Discrimination Without Having To Meet Rule 23 Requirements, Richard J. Epps Jr.

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Wildcat Strikes: The Unions' Narrowing Path To Rectitude?, M. Jay Whitman

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Reflections On The Senate Investigation Of Army Surveillance, Lawrence M. Baskir

Indiana Law Journal

SYMPOSIUM:

The Military After Vietnam: The Search for Legal Controls

Title Vii And Postjudgment Class Actions, John F. Crawford

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Post Trial Motions Under The New Indiana Rules, Edwin H. Greenebaum

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Pretrial Discovery And The Adversary System, By William A. Glaser, Floyd Abrams

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

In Defense Of The Doctrine Of Mutuality Of Estoppel, Edwin H. Greenebaum

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Mutuality Of Estoppel-Affirmative Use Of Collateral Estoppel- Conflicting Judgments Affecting Similarly Situated Claimants, William R. Pietz

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Discovery Of Expert Opinion In Land Condemnation Proceedings

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Federal District Court Consolidation Orders And The Final Judgment Rule

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

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 …

Transfer Of Civil Actions Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(A)

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.