Civil Procedure Commons^™

The Silent Revolution, Faust Rossi

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Curbing Litigation Abuses: Judicial Control Of Adversary Ethics—The Model Rules Of Professional Conduct And Proposed Amendments To The Rules Of Civil Procedure, Richard H. Underwood

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This Article addresses the effectiveness of recent developments and proposals related to abusive litigation, and discusses them in the context of recent opinions illustrating the power of the trial judge to control the excesses of the adversary system. It rejects the countersuit as a time-consuming and costly means of controlling litigation abuses, and concludes that “tinkering changes” in the rules of procedure cannot bring about true reform. It is urged here that the burden resulting from abuse of litigation can only be relieved by changes which foster stronger judicial control of adversarial ethics, and greater judicial involvement in the pretrial …

Litigation Implications Of The Chicago O'Hara Airport Crash Of American Airlines Flight 191, 15 J. Marshall L. Rev. 273 (1982), John J. Kennelly

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

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

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Colloquy On Complex Litigation, Alvin B. Rubin, Francis R. Kirkham, Weyman I. Lundquist, Jerrold E. Salzman

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Survey Of Developments In The Fourth Circuit: 1980

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Restating Territorial Jurisdiction And Venue For State And Federal Courts, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

"Jurisdiction must become venue," concluded Professor Albert A. Ehrenzweig. Perhaps it should. More certain is the proposition that comprehending jurisdiction requires mastering its relationship with venue. Such conclusions lie at some distance, however, bringing to mind that every journey must begin with a single step. A solid first step takes me to the subject of this Symposium, the Restatement (Second) of Judgments. This, put simply, is a masterful work. Even while still in tentative drafts, it proved an invaluable aid to judge, practitioner, teacher, and student. Yet in a work of such scope, anyone could find grounds for differing. …

Mandatory Intervention: Expansion Of Collateral Estoppel In Favor Of Single Defendants Against Multiple Plaintiffs In Federal Civil Litigation, 14 J. Marshall L. Rev. 441 (1981), Michael C. Sachs

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Collateral Estoppel And Supreme Court Disposition Of Moot Cases, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

In response to the Government's novel proposal in Velsicol, this Note reconsiders the procedures by which the Supreme Court could dispose of moot cases. Section I examines the collateral estoppel effects of the Supreme Court's present procedure and the Government's proposal in Velsicol. Section II concludes that both procedures afford excessive protection from collateral estoppel because they misconceive the purpose of Supreme Court review. The Note suggests that, when faced with a moot federal petition for certiorari, the Supreme Court should either deny the petition or, if certiorari has already been granted, dismiss the case.

Litigation Primer For Standing Dismissals, John H. Garvey

Scholarly Articles

Professor Carvey examines a very theoretical issue-whether standing objections are jurisdictional, claim-related, or both-to resolve a rery practical problem-hotc to characterize motions to dismiss for lack of standing, As he notes. the choice of characterization under the Federal Rules of Ciril Procedure has important practical consequences for the litigator, involving cridentiary limitations, consolidation requirements, and the resjudcata effcct of dismissal. Professor Carrey suggests. as a solution to the litigator's dilemma, that both rule 12(b k I and rule 121b t16 are appropriate means by which to raise standing objections in the constitutional sense since a determination that the plaintiff lacks …

The Code Of Professional Responsibility As A Measure Of Attorney Liability In Civil Litigation, Charles W. Wolfram

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

A Proposed Amendment To Rule 26(B)(4)(B): The Expert Twice Retained, Andrew J. Miller

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This article will focus on whether the hiring of the free agent as a non-trial expert, in order to conceal information from other parties to the litigation, is in keeping with the underlying goals and values of present discovery practice. Part I of this note discusses the discoverability of experts in general, then examines the various rationales underlying the so-called unfairness doctrine supporting the trial/non-trial expert distinction. Part II presents the case for divergent treatment of the free agent and the regularly retained expert. Subpart A of that section will explain the lack of judicial scrutiny in this area, while …

Proposed Citizens Right To Standing Act-Finding The Keys To Unlock The Courthouse Doors, Harold W. Wood, Jr.

Seattle University Law Review

Recent Supreme Court decisions severely restrict the right of citizens to litigate in federal courts. The Court's standing requirements not only limit the ability of citizens to successfully invoke federal court jurisdiction, but also confuse lower courts and litigants attempting to apply the requirements. Standing requirements have met with increasing criticism. And Congress is now considering legislative modification of standing doctrine. Unfortunately, the Court's employment of constitutional foundations in establishing current standing requirements imposes substantial roadblocks Congress must avoid to enact remedial standing legislation. This comment examines the constitutional and pragmatic difficulties of statutory modification of standing requirements and recommends …

Civil Litigation And Jura Novit Curia, Lawrence G. Baxter

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Practitioner's Guide To The Management And Use Of Expert Witnesses In Washington Civil Litigation, Thomas V. Harris

Seattle University Law Review

The Washington litigation process places a premium on the skillful management of expert witnesses. Testimony presented by such witnesses is both readily admissible and virtually unlimited in scope. Washington's adoption of the new Rules of Evidence can only serve to reinforce the current practice. Since most litigated cases involve substantial factual disputes, the development and presentation of expert testimony should be a major concern of all trial attorneys. The importance of trial examination has never been underrated. That part of the litigation process is one that all attorneys relish. The skillful management of expert witnesses, however, involves far more than …

Summary Judgements In Antitrust Conspiracy Litigation, C. Paul Rogers Iii.

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

No abstract provided.

Improving On The Contingent Fee, Kevin M. Clermont, John D. Currivan

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Two basic fees--contingent and hourly--dominate the variety of fees that lawyers charge clients for pursuing damage claims. Each of these two types has its advantages; each is plagued with substantial disadvantages. This Article proposes a new type of fee, one that preserves the respective advantages of the two present fees while minimizing their distinct disadvantages.

In essence, the proposed fee calls for the payment, on a contingent basis, of an amount computed by adding one component tied to hours worked and another component linked to amount recovered. The preferability and feasibility of this proposed fee argue for the abolishment, or …

Attorney’S Affidavit In Litigation Proceedings, John H. Garvey

Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Practice And Procedure, R. Neal Batson, Ben F. Johnson Iii

Mercer Law Review

This article opened last year with a discussion of McGovern v. American Airlines, Inc. and the principle that it is the plaintiff's burden to allege and invoke federal jurisdiction. McGovern was undercut somewhat by the 1976 case of Skidmore v. Syntex Laboratories, Inc. Indeed, one dissenting judge argued that the Fifth Circuit was permitting jurisdiction even though the plaintiff had failed to make even a prima facie showing of essential jurisdictional facts. The plaintiff, a Texas citizen, brought a products-liability diversity action against one Delaware corporation and one Panamanian corporation. The plaintiff, even after substantial discovery, was unable to demonstrate …

Trial Practice And Procedure, J. Ralph Beaird, C. Ronald Ellington

Mercer Law Review

Each year the Georgia appellate courts decide several hundred cases that raise issues of trial practice and procedure. The period surveyed in this article covers the tenth year of cases interpreting the Long-Arm Statute and the ninth year of cases decided under the Civil Practice Act. The gradual judicial development of these important laws has been fascinating to watch and comment on. A steady improvement in both the quality and predictability of these decisions can be observed and should be applauded.

The cases selected for comment herein are those deemed the most significant because they either indicate a new direction …

Standing, Mootness, And Federal Rule 23—Balancing Perspectives, Mary Kay Kane

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Practice And Procedure, R. Neal Batson, Ben F. Johnson Iii

Mercer Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Vanishing Right Of A Plaintiff To Voluntarily Dismiss His Action, 9 J. Marshall J. Prac. & Proc. 853 (1976), Cary Fleisher

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The 1975 New York Judicial Conference Package: Class Actions And Comparative Negligence, Adolf Homburger

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Glance At Summary Judgment, Thomas J. Browning

Mercer Law Review

EDITOR'S NOTE: A motion for summary judgment is one of the most frequently used pre-trial motions. The following article was written as a quick-reference index for the Judges of the Cobb Superior Court in ruling on these motions. In keeping with our policy of presenting articles to aid the practicing attorney, as well as the academician, we are including the article in this year's Survey. This is the authority practicing attorneys will no doubt face from the Georgia judiciary on a motion for summary judgment.

I. PURPOSE

Purpose of Summary Judgment: A primary purpose of the summary judgment procedure is …

Class Actions Under Rule 23(B)(2): A Type Of Class Action Which Does Not Require Eisen Notice, Gary L. Eby

Cleveland State Law Review

This comment will address the subject of class actions under Federal Rule 23(b) (2) and will trace the development of notice requirements, taking note of the split of authority on the issue. The holding and the deceivingly broad language of the Supreme Court's decision in Eisen will also be examined in order to illustrate its lack of effect on the (b) (2) notice requirements that have developed in the lower courts.

Instructing The Deadlocked Jury: Some Practical Considerations, 8 J. Marshall J. Prac. & Proc. 169 (1974), Thomas H. Senneff

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Shareholder Derivative Actions: A Modest Proposal To Revise Federal Rule 23.1, Robert A. Kessler

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The purpose of this article is to suggest the addition of two words, "if necessary"-or better yet, the phrase "if necessary under the law of the forum state"-to clause (1) of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.1. This Rule sets forth the requirements for a shareholder's derivative action in the federal courts.

Manageability Of Notice And Damage Calculation In Consumer Class Actions, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Comment will examine the likelihood that Rule 23, as it has been interpreted since its amendment, will provide a mechanism through which consumers may successfully resolve their grievances. The focus will be on the manageability problems of providing the requisite notice and of devising a method of calculation and distribution of damages.

The Consumer Class Action, Arthur H. Travers Jr., Jonathan M. Landers

Publications

No abstract provided.