Civil Procedure Commons^™

The Potential And Challenges Of Transnational Litigation For Feminist Concerned About Domestic Violence Here And Abroad, Merle H. Weiner

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

No abstract provided.

Into The Abyss: How Party Autonomy Supports Overreaching Through The Exercise Of Unequal Bargaining Power, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 421 (2003), Pamela Edwards

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mandamus As A Weapon Of "Class Warfare" In Sixth Amendment Jurisprudence: A Case Comment On United States V. Santos, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 733 (2003), John F. Costello Jr.

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Forum Selection Clauses In Diversity Actions, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 941 (2003), Kendra Johnson Panek

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Agreeing To Disagree: A Balanced Solution To Whether Parties May Contract For Expanded Judicial Review Beyond The Faa, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1005 (2003), Anthony J. Longo

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fundamental Principles For Class Action Governance, Alexandra Lahav

Faculty Articles and Papers

Class actions face a crisis of governance. The form of governance provided by Rule 23, governance by representative parties, is both vague in theory and ignored in practice. Instead, by a combination of procedural rules, judicial interpretation and common practice, the class is governed by a regime of attorney dictatorship with limited judicial oversight. This regime neither reflects the basic insight that the class and attorney do not have a traditional attorney-client relationship nor performs the task of transforming the inchoate collectivity of the class into an organization that protects and is responsive to the will of class members. This …

Destruction Of Documents Before Proceedings Commence: What Is A Court To Do?, Camille Cameron, Jonathan Liberman

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The effective performance by courts of their adjudicative role depends on the availability of relevant evidence. In civil proceedings, the discovery process aims to ensure that such evidence is available. If documents that would be relevant evidence in a trial are destroyed, a fair adjudication is made difficult, if not impossible. This is so whether the destruction of documents occurs before or after proceedings commence. This article asks what a trial judge should do in a situation where relevant evidence is unavailable because one of the parties has destroyed documents before the proceedings commenced but anticipating that such proceedings were …

Symposium Introduction: Perspectives On Dispute Resolution In The Twenty-First Century, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Deregulating Voluntary Dismissals, Michael E. Solimine, Amy E. Lippert

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) and its state law counterparts permit, under certain circumstances, a plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss her lawsuit without prejudice. Within certain windows of opportunity, plaintiffs can take this unilateral action without the permission of the defendant or of the court, and without any conditions attached. When those windows are closed, plaintiffs can still seek dismissal with the approval of the defendant or of the court. This regime is problematic: giving plaintiffs this unilateral power is an anachronism in an age of managerial judging, and can be considerably inconvenient for defendants. Likewise, the case law has …

Section 1983 Litigation: Supreme Court Review, Erwin Chemerinsky, Martin A. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fact-Finding In Civil Domestic Violence Cases: Secondary Traumatic Stress And The Need For Compassionate Witness, Ann E. Freedman

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

No abstract provided.

Expert Information And Expert Evidence: A Preliminary Taxonomy, Samuel R. Gross, Jennifer L. Mnookin

Articles

Federal Rule of Evidence 702 speaks in very general terms. It governs every situation in which "scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact," and provides that, in that situation, "a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise . . . .' In 2000, following a trio of Supreme Court cases interpreting Rule 702, the Rule was amended to include a third requirement, in addition to the helpfulness of the testimony and the qualifications of the witness: reliability. Under Rule 702 …

Whiplash: Who's To Blame?, Valerie P. Hans, Juliet Dee

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Tom is sitting in his car at an intersection, waiting for the red light to change. Without warning, the car behind him, driven by a distracted mother named Elaine, slams into the rear of Tom's car. After the accident, Tom experiences severe neck pain, which interferes with his work and family life. Who's to blame?

If Tom suffered physical injury as a result, then under current legal principles she is responsible for compensating him for his injury. However, research on jury decision making in civil cases suggests that a constellation of psychological, legal and political factors operate together to focus …

Clear Sailing Agreements: A Special Form Of Collusion In Class Action Settlements, William D. Henderson

Articles by Maurer Faculty

A clear sailing agreement (or clause) is a compromise in which a class action defendant agrees not to contest the class lawyer's petition for attorneys' fees. This Article argues that clear sailing provisions often facilitate collusive settlements in cases involving non-pecuniary relief or claims-made common funds that return all unclaimed monies to the defendant. Because these types of settlements present difficult valuation problems, trial courts lack a clear benchmark for calculating attorneys' fees. Defendants and class can exploit this uncertainty by presenting an inflated settlement value to the court (to justify higher attorneys' fees) while simultaneously reducing the true cost …

Litigation Realities, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

After both summarizing recent empirical work and presenting new observations on each of the six phases of a civil lawsuit (forum, pretrial, settlement, trial, judgment, and appeal), the authors draw a series of lessons for understanding and using empirical methods in the study of the legal system's operation. In so doing, they generate implications for current and projected policy debates concerning litigation, while identifying areas that demand further empirical work.

Seeing The Appellate Horizon: Civil Trial Strategy And Standards Of Review In The Eighth Circuit, R. Christopher Lawson

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

The Right To Trial By Jury In Arkansas After Merger Of Law And Equity, John J. Watkins

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Practitioner's Guide To Arkansas's New Judicial Article, Larry Brady, J.D. Gingerich

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Juries, Judges, And Punitive Damages: An Empirical Study, Theodore Eisenberg, Neil Lafountain, Brian Ostrom, David Rottman, Martin T. Wells

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This Article, the first broad-based analysis of punitive damages in judge-tried cases, compares judge and jury performance in awarding punitive damages and in setting their levels. Data covering one year of judge and jury trial outcomes from forty-five of the nation's largest counties yield no substantial evidence that judges and juries differ in the rate at which they award punitive damages or in the central relation between the size of punitive awards and compensatory awards. The relation between punitive and compensatory awards in jury trials is strikingly similar to the relation in judge trials. For a given level of compensatory …

Jurisdictional Gerrymandering - Responding To Holmes Group V. Vornado Air Circulation Systems, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (2002), Molly Mosley-Goren

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Recognition And Enforcement Of Foreign Judgments In The United States: The Need For Federal Legislation, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 229 (2003), Violeta I. Balan

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Hired Guns And Smoking Guns: Mccabe V British American Tobacco Australia Ltd, Camille Cameron

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Significant ethical and procedural issues raised in the case of McCabe v British American Tobacco Australia Services Ltd - history of events leading to the Supreme Court of Victoria decision, particularly the implementation of the controversial 'Document Retention Policy' - procedural issues, including the role and purpose of discovery, nature of the striking out remedy and extent to which the adversarial system might be to blame for some of the conduct of the defence and its solicitors - ethical issues raised in the case - close links between American and Australian tobacco litigation and the influence of American tobacco lawyers …

Introduction: Favorite Insurance Cases Symposium, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Insurance law scholars and teachers sometimes feel, with a mixture of paranoia and justification, that insurance law simply does not receive its proper respect in the hierarchy of legal education and law generally.

Consider the law school curriculum. In none of America’s nearly 200 ABA-approved law schools in insurance law a required course. Nor is it considered a course that, although not required, prudent students “must” be sure to take before they graduate (e.g. Evidence, Corporations). Enrollments may be respectable but the class is seldom oversubscribed, even where the law school is located in an insurance hub city. Although other …

Timeless And Ahead Of Its Time: Lach's V. Fidelity & Casualty Of New York, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

The publication of Judge Keeton's important article “inventing” the reasonable expectations doctrine in 1971 is notable for infusing a good deal of intellectual energy into the study of insurance law, particularly judicial decisions about insurance coverage. Keeton's article, which deduced from cases the principle that courts tended to interpret policies to vindicate the objectively reasonable expectations of the insured, has rightly been viewed as a milestone. It clarified an area of law long seen as inconsistent or result-oriented. It spurred additional important scholarship in the area and elevated insurance caselaw from something of a backwater to at least a respectable …

Federal Class Action Reform In The United States: Past And Future And Where Next?, Edward H. Cooper

Articles

Predicting the likely future developments in class action practice in the federal courts of the United States must begin in the past.

The Communities That Make Standards Of Care Possible, Anita Bernstein

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Is The "Adequacy" Standard A More Political Question That The 'Equality' Standard?: The Effect Of Standards-Based Education On Judicial Standards For Education Finance Litigation, Avidan Y. Cover

Faculty Publications

This Note argues that the recent shift in state court litigation from an equality claim to one of adequacy has compelled many courts to insert themselves in the discussion and creation of educational policy that was previously viewed as unacceptable. This evolution may render courts vulnerable to appellate challenges and criticisms of nonjusticiability and political question doctrine violations regarding institutional competence and judicial prudence. In addition, the demise of the equality argument diminishes the moral strength of the court's normative valuation capacity. Section I examines the history of education finance cases and reviews the three waves of litigation strategies, which …

Judge Harry Edwards: A Case In Point!, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Judge Harry Edwards dislikes empirical work that is not flattering to federal appellate judges. A few years ago Dean Richard Revesz published an empirical study of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit providing further support for the rather tame proposition that judges’ political orientation has some effect on outcome in some politically charged cases. A year later Judge Edwards published a criticism phrased in extreme terms. Dean Revesz then wrote a devastating reply by which he demonstrated that Judge Edwards “is simply wrong with respect to each of the numerous criticisms that he levels.” We believe …

Plaintiphobia In The Appellate Courts: Civil Rights Really Do Differ From Negotiable Instruments, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Professors Clermont and Eisenberg conducted a systematic analysis of appellate court behavior and report that defendants have a substantial advantage over plaintiffs on appeal. Their analysis attempted to control for different variables that may affect the decision to appeal or the appellate outcome, including case complexity, case type, amount in controversy, and whether there had been a judge or a jury trial. Once they accounted for these variables and explored and discarded various alternate explanations, they came to the conclusion that a defendants' advantage exists probably because of appellate judges' misperceptions that trial level adjudicators are pro-plaintiff.

Discoverability Of "Deleted" E-Mail: Time For A Closer Examination , Michael Marron

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment will argue that the discovery rules presently require disclosure of an unacceptable amount of information. Part II of this Comment will outline some of e-mail's advantages over other communications media to help explain the rapid rise in e-mail use. Part III will then explain, in layman's terms, how e-mail actually works and discuss some of the reasons why e-mail archives are often considered as likely to contain “smoking gun” messages—the kind of evidence that can drastically affect the outcome of a case. But what is it about e-mail that can make it such a potent evidentiary weapon? The …