Law Commons^™

„Zuerst Schlichten, Dann Richten“: O Modelo Suíço De Solução De Litígios Pré-Processual É Adequado Para O Brasil?, Nelson Rodrigues Netto

Nelson Rodrigues Netto

Dieser Aufsatz analysiert die Schlichtung und die Mediation in der Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung.

Valuing Mom & Dad: Calculating Loss Of Parental Nurture In A Wrongful Death Action, Andrew J. Laurila

Andrew J. Laurila

No abstract provided.

Wasting The Corporate Waste Doctrine: Why Waste Claims Are Obsolete In Delaware Corporate Law And Why The Waste Doctrine Is The Wrong Solution To The Problem Of Executive Compensation, Kris S. Swift

Kris S. Swift

Abstract

Kristen S. Swift

This Note makes several points, drawn from Delaware litigation history, on the futility of pleading corporate waste in Delaware. At inception, the waste doctrine was a tool for shareholder protection and empowerment; however, as calculated business risk became encouraged and later formally protected by the business judgment rule, the waste doctrine evolved to protect officers and boards and now sets a nearly impossible benchmark for misconduct that would allow shareholders to recover on a waste claim. The waste doctrine is inextricably tied to how business risk-taking is perceived by Delaware courts and shifting attitudes toward risk …

Abduction, Torture, Interrogation - Oh My! An Argument Against Extraordinary Rendition, Kaitlyn E. Tucker

Kaitlyn E Tucker

An American citizen waits patiently in an airport terminal in Jordan for a flight back to the United States. Several men – Jordanian officials – are watching the American and waiting for the right moment to approach him. The American gets up and starts to walk away, perhaps to get a cup of coffee. The Jordanian officials stop the American quickly and take him to a secluded part of the airport. For the next several days, the Jordanians question the American relentlessly, trying to discover his connection to the torture of hundreds of Muslim and Middle Eastern individuals. They do …

Holmes And The Common Law: A Jury's Duty, Matthew P. Cline

Matthew P Cline

The notion of a small group of peers whose responsibility it is to play a part in determining the outcome of a trial is central to the common conception of the American legal system. Memorialized in the Constitution of the United States as a fundamental right, and in the national consciousness as the proud, if begrudged, duty of all citizens, juries are often discussed, but perhaps not always understood. Whatever misunderstandings have come to be, certainly many of them sprang from the juxtaposition of jury and judge. Why do we have both? How are their responsibilities divided? Who truly decides …

Full Disclosure: Cognitive Science, Informants, And Search Warrant Scrutiny, Mary Bowman

Mary N. Bowman

Full Disclosure: Cognitive Science, Informants, and Search Warrant Scrutiny

By Mary Nicol Bowman

This article posits that cognitive biases play a significant role in the gap between the rhetoric regarding Fourth Amendment protection and actual practices regarding search warrant scrutiny, particularly for search warrants based on informants’ tips. Specifically, this article examines the ways in which implicit bias, tunnel vision, priming, and hindsight bias can affect search warrants. These biases can affect each stage of the search warrant process, including targeting decisions, the drafting process, the magistrate’s decision whether to grant the warrant, and post-search review by trial and appellate …

Three-Dimensional Sovereign Immunity, Sarah L. Brinton

Sarah L Brinton

The Supreme Court has erred on sovereign immunity. The current federal immunity doctrine wrongly gives Congress the exclusive authority to waive immunity (“exclusive congressional waiver”), but the Constitution mandates that Congress share the waiver power with the Court. This Article develops the doctrine of a two-way shared waiver and then explores a third possibility: the sharing of the immunity waiver power among all three branches of government.

Bad Briefs, Bad Law, Bad Markets: Documenting The Poor Quality Of Plaintiffs’ Briefs, Its Impact On The Law, And The Market Failure It Reflects, Scott A. Moss

Scott A Moss

For a major field, employment discrimination suffers surprisingly low-quality plaintiff’s lawyering. This Article details a study of several hundred summary judgment briefs, finding as follows: (1) the vast majority of plaintiffs’ briefs omit available caselaw rebutting key defense arguments, many falling far below basic professional standards with incoherent writing or no meaningful research; (2) low-quality briefs lose at over double the rate of good briefs; and (3) bad briefs skew caselaw evolution, because even controlling for won/loss rate, bad plaintiffs’ briefs far more often yield decisions crediting debatable defenses. These findings are puzzling; in a major legal service market, how …

Too Much Process, Not Enough Service: International Service Of Process Under The Hague Service Convention, Eric Porterfield

Eric Porterfield

Service of process under the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (“Hague Service Convention”) is too costly, time consuming, and unreliable. The Hague Service Convention’s defining feature – the Central Authority system – adds unwarranted expense and delay to the already expensive and protracted process of civil litigation. Worse, however, is the fact that the Central Authority completely fails to effect service on a foreign party in a significant percentage of cases. For decades, courts and commentators have argued over whether the Hague Service Convention actually permits litigants to sidestep the …

Guns, Violence, And Schools: Policies To Prevent And Respond To School Shootings, Mark A. Velez

Mark A. Velez

The United States continues to deal with school shootings. The most recent massacre occurred in 2012 at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Several strategies have been used to try and prevent such tragedies from happening. These strategies have included tough gun laws, gun-free school zones, and updating school policies and infrastructure. However, despite these, and other, strategies, school shootings continue to occur. Unfortunately, when a school shooting occurs, school personnel and children are left helpless until the police arrive or the shooter decides to end the rampage. During this time many lives may be lost. Therefore, it …

In Defense Of Implied Injunctive Relief In Constitutional Cases, John F. Preis

John F. Preis

Guns, Violence, And School Shootings: A Policy Change To Arm Some Teachers And School Personnel, Mark A. Velez

Mark A. Velez

The United States continues to deal with school shootings. The most recent massacre occurred in 2012 at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Several strategies have been used to try and prevent such tragedies from happening. These strategies have included tough gun laws, gun-free school zones, and updating school policies and infrastructure. However, despite these, and other, strategies, school shootings continue to occur. Unfortunately, when a school shooting occurs, school personnel and children are left helpless until the police arrive or the shooter decides to end the rampage. During this time many lives may be lost. Therefore, it …

Beyond Uniqueness: Reimagining Tribal Courts' Jurisdiction, Katherine J. Florey

Katherine J. Florey

If there is one point about tribal status that the Supreme Court has stressed for decades if not centuries, it is the notion that tribes as political entities are utterly one of a kind. This is to some extent reasonable; tribes, unlike other governments, have suffered the painful history of colonial conquest, making some distinctive treatment eminently justifiable. But recent developments have demonstrated to many tribes that uniqueness has its disadvantages. In the past few decades, the Supreme Court has undertaken a near-complete dismantling of tribal civil jurisdiction over nonmembers. Under current law, tribes have virtually no authority to permit …

Timeless Trial Strategies And Tactics: Lessons From The Classic Claus Von Bülow Case, Daniel M. Braun

Daniel M Braun

In this new Millennium -- an era of increasingly complex cases -- it is critical that lawyers keep a keen eye on trial strategy and tactics. Although scientific evidence today is more sophisticated than ever, the art of effectively engaging people and personalities remains prime. Scientific data must be contextualized and presented in absorbable ways, and attorneys need to ensure not only that they correctly understand jurors, judges, witnesses, and accused persons, but also that they find the means to make their arguments truly resonate if they are to formulate an effective case and ultimately realize justice. A decades-old case …

The Risky Interplay Of Tort And Criminal Law: Punitive Damages, Daniel M. Braun

Daniel M Braun

The rise of modern mass tort litigation in the U.S. has transformed punitive damages into something of a “hot button” issue. Since the size of punitive damage awards grew so dramatically in the past half century, this private law remedy has begun to involve issues of constitutional rights that traditionally pertained to criminal proceedings. This has created a risky interplay between tort and criminal law, and courts have thus been trying to find ways to properly manage punitive damage awards. The once rapidly expanding universe of punitive damages is therefore beginning to contract. There remain, however, very serious difficulties. Despite …

The Politics Of Procedure: An Empirical Analysis Of Motion Practice In Civil Rights Litigation Under The New Plausibility Standard, Raymond H. Brescia, Edward J. Ohanian

Raymond H Brescia

Is civil procedure political? In May of 2009, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, which explicitly extended the “plausibility standard,” first articulated in Bell Atlantic v. Twombly two years earlier, to all civil pleadings. That standard requires that pleadings, in order to satisfy Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, must state a plausible claim for relief. For many, these rulings represented a sea change in civil pleading standards. Where prior Supreme Court precedent had provided that a pleading should not be dismissed “unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no …

Defenseless Self-Defense: An Essay On Goldberg And Zipursky's Civil Recourse Defended, Alan Calnan

Alan Calnan

In a recent symposium published by the Indiana Law Journal, Professors John C.P. Goldberg and Benjamin C. Zipursky offer a spirited defense of their theory of civil recourse, which sees the tort system exclusively as a means of empowering victims of wrongs. This essay assails that defense, finding it curiously defenseless in three related respects. First, civil recourse’s key tenets are particularly vulnerable to criticism because they are quietly reductive, inscrutably vague, and highly unstable. Second, even in its most coherent form, civil recourse theory literally lacks any meaningful explanation of the defensive rights at play within the tort system. …

Three-Dimensional Sovereign Immunity, Sarah L. Brinton

Sarah L Brinton

The Supreme Court has erred on sovereign immunity. The current federal immunity doctrine wrongly gives Congress the exclusive authority to waive immunity (“exclusive congressional waiver”), but the Constitution mandates that Congress share the waiver power with the Court. This Article develops the doctrine of a two-way shared waiver and then explores a third possibility: the sharing of the immunity waiver power among all three branches of government.

Elementary Pleading, Charles B. Campbell

Charles B. Campbell

This article is a sequel to A “Plausible” Showing After Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, which suggested that Twombly required “direct or inferential allegations respecting all the material elements necessary to sustain recovery under some viable legal theory.” This standard—referred to here as elementary pleading—has been cited thousands of times since Twombly. After Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the elementary pleading standard fits within a three-part framework that requires the court and litigants to identify the elements of the plaintiff’s claim, to identify and disregard conclusory allegations, and, finally, to assess the well-pleaded allegations to determine whether they constitute a “plausible claim …

Student, Esquire?: The Practice Of Law In The Collaborative Classroom, Nantiya Ruan

Nantiya Ruan

Law faculty and non-profit lawyers are working together in a variety of partnerships to offer students exposure to “real life” clients in the first year of law school, as well as in advanced courses in substantive areas. Teachers engaged in client-centered advocacy through experiential frameworks have broken out of their isolated silos in the law school (e.g., legal writing, clinical, externship, and doctrinal) and begun to work together. To help students develop a sense of professional identity, cultivate professional values, and tap into key intrinsic motivations for lawyering, such as serving the public good, collaborative classrooms have an important role …

"When Numbers Get Serious": A Study Of Plain English Usage In Briefs Filed Before The New York Court Of Appeals, Ian Gallacher

Ian Gallacher

This article describes the results of a study of briefs filed in the New York Court of Appeals between 1969 and 2008. In particular, portions of these briefs were analyzed using the Flesch Reading Ease test and the Flesh-Kincaid test. The first of these tests claims to determine how "readable" a piece of text might be, and the second expresses its results in terms of the grade level a hypothetical reader should have attained before the given text becomes "readable." Both of these tests are fallible, especially when used to determine the actual "readability" of a piece of text, but …

Informal Deference: A Historical, Empirical, And Normative Analysis Of Patent Claim Construction, Jonas Anderson, Peter S. Menell

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

Patent scope plays a central role in the operation of the patent system, making patent claim construction a critical aspect of just about every patent litigation. With the resurgence of patent jury trials in the 1980s, the allocation of responsibility for interpreting patent claims between trial judge and jury emerged as a salient issue. While the Supreme Court’s Markman decision usefully removed claim construction from the black box of jury deliberations notwithstanding its "mongrel" mixed fact/law character, the Federal Circuit's adherence to the view that claim construction is a pure question of law subject to de novo appellate review produced …

Playing To The Audience, David Spratt

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

No abstract provided.

Teaching The Power Of Empathy In Domestic And Transnational Experiential Public Defender Courses, Cary Bricker

cary a bricker

Abstract: This article begins with the premise that empathy benefits lawyers, irrespective of age, sex, years of experience or nationality. Building on a body of literature that analyzes why empathic relationships are so integral to client satisfaction, and drawing lessons from medical literature addressing the analogous role of empathy in physician-patient relationships, the article argues that real connection with clients also results in lawyer satisfaction, improving quality of professional life and client representation, reducing burn-out and fostering a personal commitment to advancing social justice. The article also argues that lawyers share a common goal to acquire tools necessary to engage …

In Quest Of The Arbitration Trifecta, Or Closed Door Litigation?: The Delaware Arbitration Program, Thomas Stipanowich

Thomas J. Stipanowich

The Delaware Arbitration Program established a procedure by which businesses can agree to have their disputes heard in an arbitration proceeding before a sitting judge of the state’s highly regarded Chancery Court. The Program arguably offers a veritable trifecta of procedural advantages for commercial parties, including expert adjudication, efficient case management and short cycle time and, above all, a proceeding cloaked in secrecy. It also may enhance the reputation of Delaware as the forum of choice for businesses. But the Program’s ambitious intermingling of public and private forums brings into play the longstanding tug-of-war between the traditional view of court …

Superiority As Unity, Jay Tidmarsh

Jay Tidmarsh

One of Professor Redish’s many important contributions to legal scholarship is his recent work on class actions. Grounding his argument in the theory of democratic accountability that has been at the centerpiece of all his work, Professor Redish suggests that, in nearly all instances, class actions violate the individual autonomy of litigants and should not be used by courts. This Essay begins from the opposite premise: that class actions should be grounded in the notion of social utility rather than autonomy so that class actions should be used whenever they achieve net social gains. This idea of “superiority” presents some …

Lafler's Remedial Uncertainty: Prosecutors Can Rest Easy, Darryl K. Brown

Darryl K. Brown

Some worry that the Supreme Court's decisions in Lafler v. Cooper and Frye v. Missouri create for defendants an unfair opportunity to manipulate the criminal process. They can plead guilty and, if dissatisfied with the sentence, void the conviction on with evidence that their counsel was ineffective and thereafter exercise their right to trial. This brief essay explains why these worries are unfounded and the manipulation scenario highly implausible.

Skating Too Close To The Edge: A Cautionary Tale For Tax Practitioners About The Hazards Of Waiver, Claudine Pease-Wingenter

Claudine Pease-Wingenter

The Federal Rules of Evidence defer to common law in establishing the rules of attorney-client privilege. As a general matter, such an approach creates a fairly uncertain legal landscape as each court articulates the baseline rules somewhat differently. The varied judicial applications of those differing rules can then exacerbate the uncertainty even more.

Unfortunately, in the area of tax law, the rules and their application are particularly uncertain because attorneys and accountants have overlapping responsibilities to clients and the courts have historically refused to recognize an accountant-client privilege. During my approximately eight years practicing corporate tax law, I was acutely …

The Court And The Visual: Images And Artifacts In U.S. Supreme Court Opinions, 88 Chicago-Kent Law Review 331 (2013) (Symposium)., Nancy S. Marder

Nancy S. Marder

No abstract provided.

The "Reason Giving" Lawyer: An Ethical, Practical, And Pedagogical Perspective, Donald J. Kochan

Donald J. Kochan

Whether as a matter of duty or utility, lawyers give reasons for their actions all the time. In the various venues in which legal skills must be employed, reason giving is required in some, expected in others, desired in many, and useful in most. This Essay underscores the pervasiveness of reason giving in the practice of law and the consequent necessity of lawyers developing a skill at giving reasons. This Essay examines reason giving as an innate human characteristic related directly to our need for answers and our constant yearning to understand the answer to the question “why.” It briefly …