Civil Procedure Commons^™

Superpoked And Served: Service Of Process Via Social Networking Sites, Andriana L. Shultz

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Independent Of The Constitution?--Issues Raised By An Independent Federal Legislative Ethics Commission With Independent Enforcement Authority, Paul Taylor

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The History And Scope Of The Virginia Declaratory Judgments Act, Seth M. Land

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pro Se Litigation: Best Practices From A Judge's Perspective, Hon. Beverly W. Snukals, Glen H. Sturtevant Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Civil Practice And Procedure, John C. Lynch, Jon S. Hubbard, M. Elizabeth Woodard

University of Richmond Law Review

This article summarizes the major developments in Virginia civil practice and procedure over the past two years, specifically covering significant decisions by the Supreme Court of Virginiaand changes to the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia dating from April 22, 2005, to April 20, 2007. The article also addresses legislative enactments by the General Assembly in its 2005 and 2006 sessions.

The Safe Harbor Of 35 U.S.C. § 271(E)(1): The End Of Enforceable Biotechnology Patents In Drug Discovery?, Paul T. Nyffeler

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Managing Preservation Obligations After The 2006 Federal E-Discovery Amendments, Thomas Y. Allman

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

The 2006 E-Discovery Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (2006 Amendments or the Amendments) do not directly address the onset or scope of preservation obligations. As noted in the September 2005 Report of the Standing Committee of the Judicial Conference recommending adoption of the 2006 Amendments, preservation obligations “arise from independent sources of law” and are dependent upon “the substantive law of each jurisdiction.” However, the Amendments have a major impact on how parties must analyze and execute preservation obligations involving electronically stored information (“ESI”).

The 2006 Amendments To The Rules Of Civil Procedure: Accessible And Inaccessible Electronic Information Storage Devices, Why Parties Should Store Electronic Information In Accessible Formats, Benjamin D. Silbert

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Discovery jurisprudence is a cornerstone of civil litigation in the United States. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as adopted in 1938, introduced a broad discovery process, which was not a previously accepted practice. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have been revised several times since 1938, reflecting the evolution of society. However, prior to 2006, 1970 was the last time the discovery rules were amended to take into account changes in information technology. In the last thirty-seven years, technological advances in electronic storage and communication have changed the way people live and how business is conducted, beyond what could …

Reassessing The Purposes Of Federal Question Jurisdiction, John F. Preis

Law Faculty Publications

For ages, judges and legal academics have claimed that federal question jurisdiction has three purposes: to provide litigants with a judge experienced in federal law, to protect litigants from state court hostility toward federal claims, and to preserve uniformity in federal law. Because federal claims, for the most part, have always been cognizable in state courts, these purposes imply that state courts are less experienced, more hostile, and more likely to adjudicate federal law in ways that decrease the uniformity of federal law. Despite the ongoing allegiance to this conception of federal question jurisdictionand by implication, state court adjudication of …

Proving Lost Profits Under Daubert: Five Questions Every Court Should Ask Before Admitting Expert Testimony, Robert M. Lloyd

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Medical Malpractice Law, Kathleen M. Mccauley, Dana A. Dews

University of Richmond Law Review

With President George W. Bush's promise to continue working toward tort reform, medical malpractice issues are once again garnering media and voter attention. This article examines recent judicial decisions and statutory amendments affecting patients and health care providers in the commonwealth in the context of medical malpractice law.

The Merger Of Common-Law And Equity Pleading In Virginia, W. Hamilton Bryson

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reassessing Charitable Immunity In Virginia, Carl Tobias

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

E-Commerce: Legal Issues Of The Online Retailer In Virginia, Jonathan D. Frieden, Sean Patrick Roche

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

The popularity and growth of online retailing, now in its tenth year, has shattered experts’ expectations. “Online sales in the United States grew twenty-four percent last year, to about $90 billion, and online retailing now accounts for nearly five percent of all retail sales.”

The Merger Of Common-Law And Equity Pleading In Virginia, William Hamilton Bryson

Law Faculty Publications

This article describes the separation of common law and equity in Virginia leading up to the 2006 merger of common law and equity pleading and the problems that remain to be solved by the courts.

Cumulative Supplement To Jurisdiction In Civil Action, Wendy Collins Perdue

Law Faculty Publications

Cumulative supplement to Jurisdiction in Civil Action Third Edition.

Civil Practice And Procedure, John R. Walk, Michael R. Spitzer Ii

University of Richmond Law Review

This article will summarize recent developments of interest to practitioners handling civil cases in the courts of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Specifically included are relevant decisions of the Supreme Court of Virginia dating from opinions announced on June 10, 2004 to those announced on April 22, 2005; changes to the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia announced during the same time period; and legislation enacted by the Virginia General Assembly at its 2005 Session, effective July 1, 2005.

Civil Practice And Procedure, John R. Walk

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Story Of Shaffer: Allocating Jurisdictional Authority Among The States, Wendy Collins Perdue

Law Faculty Publications

Shaffer v. Heitner is one of a long series of Supreme Court cases addressing the scope of state-court territorial authority. Indeed, Shaffer is the first of a dozen modern cases that delineated the Court's current conception of the constitutional limits on state-court jurisdictional authority.

Determining whether a court has jurisdiction to hear a dispute is an important preliminary step in any litigation. But the constitutional doctrine the Court has developed in this area is also an interesting window on the Court's more general understanding of the allocation of power among the states.

Aliens, The Internet, And "Purposeful Availment": A Reassessment Of Fifth Amendment Limits On Personal Jurisdiction, Wendy Collins Perdue

Law Faculty Publications

The international community has been struggling with questions of who should regulate the Internet and how, but little consensus has emerged. For the United States, consideration of the pros and cons of the alternative jurisdictional approaches to e-commerce and cyberspace is complicated by an overlay of constitutional law. While the rest of the world considers the policy implications of a country of origin versus a country of destination approach, the United States is wrestling with what constitutes "purposeful availment" under the Due Process Clause.

The Supreme Court has never squarely considered what limits the Fifth Amendment imposes on assertions of …

Rule 11 And Rule Revision, Carl W. Tobias, Margaret L. Sanner

Law Faculty Publications

Numerous observers of modem civil practice, whose views range across a comparatively broad spectrum, consider the 1983 amendment to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 the most controversial revision since the United States Supreme Court promulgated the original Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in 1938.1 Counsel and litigants overused and abused the 1983 modification to Rule 11 by inappropriately stressing the compensatory goal of the proviso and improperly deemphasizing the stricture's deterrence objective. Many judges vigorously enforced Rule 11, often finding violations and imposing burdensome sanctions which frequently included large attorney's fees. This activity of lawyers and parties, as well …

More Proposals To Simplify Modern Federal Procedure, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Response to Edward H. Cooper, Simplified Rules of Federal Procedure1, 100 Mich. L. Rev. 1794 (2002)

Recent Developments In Federal Jurisdiction And Pleading, Wendy Collins Perdue

Law Faculty Publications

Recent developments in federal jurisdiction and pleading including subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and notice, venue, forum non conveniens, forum selection clauses, and pleading.

The Past And Future Of The Federal Rules In State Courts, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Response to Prof. John B. Oakley's writings comparing state court procedural rules with the Federal Rules of Civil procedure.

Professor Oakley's substantial contribution to the Nevada Law Journal dispute resolution symposium neither accords much treatment to how or why the earlier uniformity between state and federal procedural regimes changed so dramatically over such a brief period nor proffers very many suggestions for the future. My response aspires primarily to scrutinize how federal-state consistency deteriorated and secondarily to consider what, if any, measures should be instituted to change the present condition of state civil procedure in the fifty jurisdictions comprising the …

Civil Procedure By Contract: A Convoluted Confluence Of Private Contract And Public Procedure In Need Of Congressional Control, David H. Taylor, Sara M. Cliffe

University of Richmond Law Review

There is great appeal to the notion that parties to a contract may provide in their agreement for how certain aspects of any dispute that may subsequently arise will be resolved. The appeal is so great, in fact, that both parties and courts have embraced the use and enforcement of pre-litigation agreements ("PLAs"). These agreements take a variety of forms. Parties may agree to the forum in which their dispute will be resolved. They may designate the law that will be applied to the resolution of the dispute. Parties may designate what evidence may or may not be presented as …

Local Federal Civil Procedure For The Twenty-First Century, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Federal civil procedure is now byzantine. Lawyers and parties face, and federal judges apply, a bewildering panorama of requirements. There are strictures in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as well as Title 28 of the United States Code and dozens of substantive statutes. A stunning array of local measures-including local rules; general, special, and scheduling orders; individual-judge practices; and mechanisms that courts adopted under the Civil Justice Reform Act (CJRA) of 1990 to reduce cost and delay-also govern cases in all ninety-four districts. Many of the provisions· are inconsistent or duplicative, while a significant percentage are difficult to discover, …

A Civil Discovery Dilemma For The Arizona Supreme Court, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The drafters of the 1938 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure hoped to establish those rules as a model that the states could adopt, thus fostering national and intrastate procedural uniformity. This objective was not realized generally or by very many specific jurisdictions. Observers of the increasingly fractured procedural regime in the federal arena have voiced concerns about the mounting numbers of strictures, the accelerating pace of procedural change and the growing inconsistency of the requirements imposed. Illustrative are the major 1983 and 1993 federal discovery amendments, which new discovery provisions further revised in December 2000. The Civil Justice Reform Act …

Erie Railroad V. Tompkins, Wendy Collins Perdue

Law Faculty Publications

Erie Railroad v. Tompkins 304 U.S. 64 (1938), limited the power of federal courts to create judge-made law that would displace state law. Jurists view the Supreme Court's decision both a modern cornerstone of American judicial federalism and an example of legal realism's influence.

The Expiration Of The Civil Justice Reform Act Of 1990, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Ever since the United States Congress passed the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 (CJRA), a minor mystery of federal court jurisprudence has been whether - and if so, precisely when - that significant and controversial legislation expired. The measure instituted unprecedented nationwide experimentation with procedures that lawmakers intended to decrease cost and delay in civil litigation, but the statute's implementation additionally balkanized federal practice and procedure.