Civil Procedure Commons^™

Procedural Political Economy, Luke P. Norris

William & Mary Law Review

When the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure came into being in 1938, a broad political economy discourse was driving significant legal and policy reform efforts. Legal scholars, economists, political leaders, and others placed questions of economic power and their relationship to democracy at the center of those reform efforts, honing and developing a political economy tradition that is a forebearer to today’s law-and-political economy (LPE) approach. Both then and today, the relationship of civil procedure to these trends has not been fully mined. This Article tells a vital part of that story, tracing the federal civil procedure system’s political economy …

The Longer-Term Impact Of Civil Justice Reform: A 10-Year Retrospective On Utah Civil Discovery Reform, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Miriam Hamilton

Faculty Publications

In 2021, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) obtained grant funding from State Justice Institute to undertake a retrospective study of the Utah civil justice reforms. The new study replicated some of the analyses from the 2015 study to compare case characteristics and outcomes against the post-implementation data extracted for the 2015 study. In addition to examining the impact on case characteristics and outcomes, an objective of the new study was to examine the impact of the Rule 26 revisions on practitioner behavior, which is less easily captured in case filings. To do so, NCSC convened a project advisory …

A Rule Without A Reason: Determining The Capacity For Negligence Of A Person With Mental Illness, Alex Geisinger, David Dematteo, Kellie Wiltsie, Chelsea Jackson

William & Mary Law Review

Since the pandemic, the impacts of structural bias on racial minorities and other groups have become an even more compelling concern for legal commentators. One group that has received some attention in the effort to confront bias is the mentally ill. This attention has coincided with a rise in the willingness of individuals to talk about, and destigmatize, mental health issues in society. Yet, despite these efforts, along with a long and well-established body of scholarship that criticizes its treatment of mental illness, the civil law—particularly the law of tort—continues its entrenched refusal to consider mental illness when determining the …

Issues, Evan C. Zoldan

William & Mary Law Review

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have issues—148 issues to be exact. Although the Rules use the term “issue” throughout their text, they do not use it in the same way each time. In some circumstances, the meaning of “issue” is made clear by surrounding context, minimizing any interpretive difficulty. But sometimes context does not clarify the term’s meaning, creating interpretive challenges. This Article argues that the ambiguous term “issue” found in Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 50 and 52 is best read to mean a “dispute of fact.” This reading best comports with judicial interpretations of Rules 50 and …

Press Play To Presume: The Policy Benefits Behind The Trademark Modernization Act's Resurrection Of The Irreparable Harm Presumption In False Advertising Cases, Daniel Stephen

William & Mary Law Review

Part I of this Note provides background information on the history and principles surrounding injunctions generally, the Supreme Court’s rulings in eBay and Winter, federal courts’ rulings after these decisions, and the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020. Part II presents anti-presumption advocates’ arguments against the presumption due to longstanding equitable concerns and because, in their view, requiring a showing of irreparable harm is not too difficult. Lastly, Part III discusses why the irreparable harm presumption in the TMA serves as beneficial policy by presenting counterarguments to anti-presumption reasoning and additional benefits of the presumption.

This abstract has been taken …

Foia-Flooded Elections, Rebecca Green

Faculty Publications

After the 2020 election, the United States has witnessed a crisis in confidence in election outcomes. The crisis has fueled massive public pressure on election offices to release election records via state 'freedom of information act" (FOIA) requests. This deluge of records requests places enormous strain on already overburdened and underfunded state and local election offices. Operating under strict statutory FOIA response deadlines, election officials spend hundreds of hours on records requests to the detriment of election preparedness potentially further exacerbating criticism of their offices. Making matters worse, election officials often lack guidance on which records may and may not …

Plaintiff's Problem: Constitutional Concerns With Service Of Process Under Alaska Rule Of Civil Procedure 4(D)(7)-(8), Casey Sawyer

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Rule 4 of Alaska’s Rules of Civil Procedure prescribes how service of process must be completed for a civil lawsuit, much like Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. When filing suit against the State of Alaska or one of its agencies or officers, Alaska Civil Rule 4(d)(7)–(8) require that service of process be delivered to multiple locations. The plaintiff will usually have to serve the Attorney General’s office in the district of filing (either Anchorage or Fairbanks) and also must deliver service of process to the Attorney General’s office in Alaska’s capital city of Juneau. If they …

Use Of Natural Language Processing (Nlp) In Civil Case Management: A Report On Three Proof Of Concept Projects, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Jannet Okazaki

Faculty Publications

In 2016, the Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) and the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA) endorsed recommendations to leverage technology to improve civil case management. In particular, Natural Language Processing (NLP) and related tools could be used to support two areas of civil case processing: sorting cases at filing based on the anticipated level of judicial involvement in case management, and confirming that essential procedural requirements have been satisfied before entering final judgments in cases.

To explore the feasibility of NLP to support court operations in these two areas, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) designed three distinct …

A Renewed Analysis Of The Expedited Actions Rules In Texas Courts, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Lindsey Wylie, Miriam Hamilton, Brittany K. T. Kauffman, Logan Cornett, James Swearingen, Michael Houlberg, Jeffrey Tsunekawa, Michael Smith, Sheri Woodfin,

Faculty Publications

In October 2021, the Texas Office of Court Administration (OCA) and the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) returned to the question of whether the Expedited Action Rules (EARs) adopted in 2012 in Texas were continuing to have a positive impact on civil case processing. With new funding from the State Justice Institute (SJI), the NCSC, OCA, and the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver, set out to replicate a 2016 study. Using the same research methods, the project team gathered data from the district and county courts in Dallas, Fort Bend, …

Substituted Service And The Hague Service Convention, William S. Dodge

William & Mary Law Review

State law plays a surprisingly large role in transnational litigation, and how it defines the applicability of the Hague Service Convention is an important example. In Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Convention does not apply when, under state law, service of process is made within the United States. In Schlunk, Illinois law permitted substituted service on the U.S. subsidiary of a foreign parent company, so the Convention did not apply. This Article looks at substituted service under state law today and when it permits avoidance of the Hague Convention. The Article focuses …

Rule 4(K), Nationwide Personal Jurisdiction, And The Civil Rules Advisory Committee: Lessons From Attempted Reform, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

On multiple occasions, I have advocated for a revision to Rule 4(k) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that would disconnect personal jurisdiction in federal courts from the jurisdictional limits of their respective host states—to no avail. In this Essay, I will review—one final time—my argument for nationwide personal jurisdiction in the federal courts, recount my (failed) attempt to persuade the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules to embrace my view, and reflect on what lessons may be drawn from the experience regarding the civil rulemaking process. My aim is to prompt discussion around potential rulemaking reforms and to equip …

Our New Normal? How Covid-19 Accelerated Pre-Pandemic Trends In State Court Litigation, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

This Article briefly summa­rizes thirty years of research conducted by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) on civil litigation in state courts, highlighting the most important trends for contemporary civil justice stakeholders. It then describes the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on civil caseloads and its implications for civil case processing. It concludes with a description of the civil justice reforms endorsed by the Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) and the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA) to address pandemic-related backlogs and to ensure a more effective civil justice system.

This abstract has been taken from the author's introduction.

Endangered Claims, Brooke D. Coleman

William & Mary Law Review

Litigants—like organisms in an ecosystem—must evolve to survive our civil justice system. When procedural rules and doctrines that govern civil litigation change, litigants must respond. In some cases, litigants will adapt to the rules. In others, they will migrate to alternative fora to capitalize on the new environment’s rules. For those who cannot adapt or migrate, their claims will go extinct.

This Article chronicles the evolution story of federal civil litigation by examining how, in response to changing procedural rules and doctrines, parties and their claims adapt, migrate, or go extinct. It shows that throughout this evolution, claims by the …

Manufacturing Sovereign State Mootness, Daniel Bruce

William & Mary Law Review

The idea that public defendants should receive any special treatment in the mootness context has been subject to intense criticism among commentators. Most notably, in the lead-up to the New York Rifle decision, Joseph Davis and Nicholas Reaves—two prominent First Amendment litigators from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty—urged the Supreme Court to take the opportunity to correct the lower courts’ practice of blessing government abuse of the voluntary cessation doctrine. Indeed, the Supreme Court has never adopted a presumption in favor of government defendants such as the one applied by the Seventh Circuit in Killeen, and it failed to …

Absurd Overlap: Snap Removal And The Rule Of Unanimity, Travis Temple

William & Mary Law Review

Snap removal employs “a literalist approach” to the statute governing the procedural mechanism for removing cases from state court to federal court. In a typical removal scenario, defendants sued in state court would have the option to be heard in federal court instead, given that certain conditions are satisfied. [S]nap removal essentially allows the defendants to forego a condition that would bar removal if they can file before the plaintiff formally notifies them of the lawsuit. This practice of removing a case before being served with formal process—essentially an act of gamesmanship of the civil procedure system—has gained appellate support …

Jury Bias Resulting In Indefinite Commitment: Expanding Procedural Protections In Svp Civil Commitment Proceedings Under The Mathews Test, Alli M. Mentch

William & Mary Law Review

Twenty states, the District of Columbia, and the federal government have enacted Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) laws that permit the civil commitment of sex offenders. Under these laws, imprisoned sex offenders serving criminal sentences are transferred to treatment facilities and held indefinitely. As one individual describes civil commitment, “It’s worse than prison. In prison I wasn’t happy, but I was content because I knew I had a release date.” An estimated 5,400 individuals are currently civilly committed under these laws.

This Note argues that such laws do not adequately protect respondents’ due process rights. To that end, this Note proposes …

The Forum-Defendant Rule, The Mischief Rule, And Snap Removal, Howard M. Wasserman

William & Mary Law Review Online

Samuel Bray’s The Mischief Rule reconceptualizes and revitalizes that venerable canon of statutory interpretation. Bray’s new approach to the mischief rule offers a textual solution to an ongoing civil procedure puzzle—forum defendants and “snap removal.” The forum-defendant rule provides that a diversity case is not removable from state to federal court when a properly joined and served defendant is a citizen of the forum state. Snap removal occurs whena defendant removes before the forum defendant has been properly served, “snapping” the case into federal court. Three courts of appeals and a majority of district courts have endorsed this practice, concluding …

The Devil In Nepa's Details: Amending Nepa To Prevent State Interference With Environmental Reviews, Clay F. Kulesza

William & Mary Law Review

The environment is susceptible to human harms because it lacks a voice of its own. Yet environmentalists have used their voices for generations to promote environmental protection, causing Congress to pass a variety of laws that prevent needless environmental destruction. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) advances this goal by directing the federal government to undergo an environmental review process anytime it wants to begin a project that could have detrimental environmental impacts. This process ensures that the federal government knows how a project will impact the environment and whether any feasible alternatives to a project may have …

An Evaluation And Performance Measure Framework For Online Dispute Resolution Programs: Assessing Improvements In Access To Justice, Andrea L. Miller, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Kathryn Genthon

Faculty Publications

One type of programming designed to improve access to justice for civil litigants is online dispute resolution (ODR). ODR generally consists of an internet-based software platform on which litigants can resolve legal problems, including negotiating settlements or exchanging information to narrow the factual and legal issues in a formal court hearing. ODR programs were first developed by online commercial businesses such as PayPal, eBay, and Amazon to resolve disputes more effectively between buyers and sellers, but they are still a relatively new innovation in courts, with most programs launching within the past three years.

ODR programs are intended to increase …

Reimagining Civil Case Management, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

Court rules are necessary, but insufficient by themselves to address problems of cost and delay. Instead, state courts today are embracing a considerably broader view of civil case management, one that encompasses the total constellation of court rules, business practices, culture and governance, and staffing and technology infrastructure. Effective case management now recognizes the importance of five core components that are necessary to achieve timely, cost-effective, and procedurally fair justice: (1) triage to ensure that cases receive attention proportional to their needs; (2) process simplification to remove procedural barriers that unnecessarily complicate litigation; (3) stakeholder engagement to ensure clear communication …

Professor Aaron-Andrew Bruhl: Reflections On The Fall 2020 Semester, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Law School Personal Reflections on COVID-19

No abstract provided.

Associations And Cities As (Forbidden) Pure Private Attorneys General, Heather Elliott

William & Mary Law Review

The Supreme Court interprets Article III’s case-or-controversy language to require a plaintiff to show injury in fact, causation, and redressability. A plaintiff who meets that tripartite test has standing to sue and thus a personal stake in pursuing the litigation. Accordingly, in Sierra Club v. Morton, the Supreme Court prohibited pure private attorneys general: litigants who would sue without the requisite personal stake. This limitation extends to organizations. They, too, must show standing on their own account or, under Hunt v. Washington Apple Advertising Commission, identify a member with Article III standing and show how the lawsuit is germane to …

Measuring The Impact Of Access To Justice Programs: An Assessment Tool For Funders And Policymakers, Thomas M. Clarke, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

Across the fifty states and the nation, many organizations have implemented a variety of programs to reduce the access-to-justice gap. The result is a widely varying patchwork of capabilities that provide different services and solutions in very different amounts that do not necessarily or even usually align with the problems that the target populations face. This paper proposes more of an “engineering” approach by introducing an analytical tool for organizations working on closing the access gap to estimate the potential impact of proposed solutions.

The tool can be used to: 1) assess the magnitude of an access problem that could …

Preventing Whack-A-Mole Management Of Consumer Debt Cases: A Proposal For A Coherent And Comprehensive Approach For State Courts, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Brittany Kauffman

Faculty Publications

The debt burden is growing, and there is a strong likelihood that state courts will see corresponding increases in debt collection caseloads. To meet the challenge, state courts need to implement policies, rules, procedures, and business practices to manage consumer debt collection cases in a more consistent and coherent manner. As part of the Civil Justice Institute Implementation Plan, the National Center for State Courts and Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System conducted preliminary research to document the impact of rules enacted in New York State on consumer debt litigation. The project also included an exploratory survey …

Out Of The Quandary: Personal Jurisdiction Over Absent Class Member Claims Explained, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Since the Supreme Court's decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County, litigants and lower courts have wrestled with the issue of whether a federal court must be able to exercise personal jurisdiction with respect to each of the claims asserted by absent class members in a class action and, if so, what standard governs that jurisdictional determination. This issue is rapidly coming to a head and is poised for inevitable resolution by the Supreme Court in the near future; multiple circuit courts have heard appeals from district courts that have reached varying conclusions on …

The Territorial Reach Of Federal Courts, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Federal courts exercise the sovereign authority of the United States when they assert personal jurisdiction over a defendant. As components of the national sovereign, federal courts' maximum territorial reach is determined by the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause, which permits jurisdiction over persons with sufficient minimum contacts with the United States and over property located therein. Why, then, are federal courts limited to the territorial reach of the states in which they sit when they exercise personal jurisdiction in most cases? There is no constitutional or statutory mandate that so constrains the federal judicial reach. Rather, it is by operation …

The Federal Courts’ Rulemaking Buffer, Jordan M. Singer

William & Mary Law Review

Procedural rulemaking is often thought of as a second-order task for the federal court system, relevant to the courts’ work but not essential to their function. In reality, rulemaking plays an integral role in the court system’s operation by actively insulating the courts from environmental pressure. This Article explains how power over procedural rulemaking protects the federal courts from environmental uncertainty and describes the court system’s efforts to maintain the effectiveness of the rulemaking buffer in response to historical and contemporary challenges.

Creating An Unprecedented Number Of Precedents At The U.S. Court Of Appeals For Veterans Claims, Natsumi Antweiler

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Haves Of Procedure, Ion Meyn

William & Mary Law Review

In litigation, “haves” and “have-nots” battle over what procedures should govern. Yet, much greater hostilities have been avoided—a war between the “haves” themselves. “Criminal haves” (prosecutors) and “civil haves” (institutional players) litigate in separate territories and under different sets of rules. This is good, for them, because they have incompatible objectives. This Article contends that protecting the “haves” from each other has profoundly influenced the development of procedure in the United States.

The “haves” reap significant benefits in being insulated from each other as they seek rules responsive to their unique preferences. A “criminal have” seeks easy access to the …

Substance, Procedure, And The Rules Enabling Act, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court promulgates rules of procedure (based on the proposals of subordinate rulemaking committees) pursuant to the Rules Enabling Act. This statute empowers the Court to prescribe "general rules of practice and procedure," with the caveat that "[s]uch rules shall not abridge, enlarge or modify any substantive right." The Act is supposed to stand as a real constraint on what rules or alterations thereof the subordinate rulemaking bodies will consider or propose, as well as on how the Court will choose to interpret any given codified Federal Rule. However, the Act has not-to date-been employed to invalidate a promulgated …