Civil Procedure Commons^™

Second-Order Diversity Revisited, Jeffrey Abramson

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Restoring The Civil Jury's Role In The Structure Of Our Government, Sheldon Whitehouse

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Political Decision Making By Informed Juries, William E. Nelson

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Introduction: The Civil Jury As A Political Institution, Jason M. Solomon, Paula Hannaford-Agor

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Diversity And The Civil Jury, Christina S. Carbone, Victoria C. Plaut

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

What's It Worth? Jury Damage Awards As Community Judgments, Valerie P. Hans

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Jury And Participatory Democracy, Alexandra D. Lahav

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fiduciary Principles And The Jury, Ethan J. Leib, Michael Serota, David L. Ponet

William & Mary Law Review

This Essay argues that because jurors exercise state authority with wide discretion over the legal and practical interests of other citizens, and because citizens repose trust and remain vulnerable to jury and juror decisions, juries and jurors share important similarities with traditional fiduciary actors such as doctors, lawyers, and corporate directors and boards. The paradigmatic fiduciary duties—those of loyalty and care—therefore provide useful benchmarks for evaluating and guiding jurors in their decisionmaking role. A sui generis public fiduciary duty of deliberative engagement also has applications in considering the obligations of jurors. This framework confirms much of what we know about …

An Exploration Of "Noneconomic" Damages In Civil Jury Awards, Herbert M. Kritzer, Guangya Liu, Neil Vidmar

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pleading And Access To Civil Justice: A Response To Twiqbal Apologists, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Professor Stephen Yeazell once wrote, ''A society based on the rule of law fails in one of its central premises if substantial parts of the population lack access to law enforcement institutions."" One apparent threat to access to justice in recent years has been the erosion of notice pleading in the federal courts in favor of a plausibility-pleading system that screens out potentially meritorious claims that fail to offer sufficient specificity and support at the pleading stage. But some have questioned whether this purported threat is more perceived than real. Indeed, this doctrinal shift has been defended in several ways …

New Hampshire: Impact Of The Proportional Discovery/Automatic Disclosure (Pad) Pilot Rules, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Nicole L. Waters, Cynthia G. Lee, Susan Keilitz

Faculty Publications

Across the nation, a growing chorus of judges, lawyers, business leaders, and consumer advocates is calling for reforms to the American civil justice system. Civil litigation, they argue, has become too time-consuming, too expensive, and too unpredictable. To address these concerns, many state and federal courts have begun to develop and implement civil justice reform efforts intended to streamline the litigation process, to minimize the potential for discovery disputes, and to expedite the fair resolution of civil cases. New Hampshire was one of the first jurisdictions to revise its rules of civil procedure with these objectives in mind. The project …

The Twin Aims Of Erie, Michael S. Green

Faculty Publications

We all remember the twin aims of the Erie rule from first-year civil procedure. A federal court sitting in diversity must use forum state law if it is necessary to avoid 'forum shopping" and the "inequitable administration of the laws." This Article offers a reading of the twin aims and a systematic analysis of their proper role in federal and state court. I argue that the twin aims apply in diversity cases not because they protect state interests, but because they serve the federal purposes standing behind the diversity statute. So understood, they are about separation of powers, not federalism. …

Class Actions, Heightened Commonality, And Declining Access To Justice, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

A prerequisite to being certified as a class under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is that there are "questions of law or fact common to the class. " Although this "commonality" requirement had heretofore been regarded as something that was easily satisfied, in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes the Supreme Court gave the requirement new vitality by reading into it an obligation to identify among the class a common injury and common questions that are "central" to the dispute. Not only is such a reading of Rule 23 's commonality requirement unsupported by the text of …

Why Agencies Punish, Max Minzner

William & Mary Law Review

In addition to promulgating regulations, federal administrative agencies penalize entities that violate their rules. In 2010 alone, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration imposed a statutory maximum $16.4 million penalty on Toyota, and the Securities and Exchange Commission recovered $535 million from Goldman Sachs, the largest civil penalty a financial services firm has ever paid. The academic literature proposes two major theories explaining why agencies might seek these monetary penalties. First, agencies might seek to deter misconduct by using civil penalties to raise the expected cost of regulatory violations above the cost of compliance. Alternatively, agencies might use civil penalties …

Plausibility Beyond The Complaint, Joseph A. Seiner

William & Mary Law Review

In Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the Supreme Court announced a new plausibility standard for a plaintiff’s allegations. The decisions may have even broader implications, however, as many federal district courts have already applied this pleading standard to a defendant’s affirmative defenses. This Article makes sense of Twombly and Iqbal in the context of the affirmative defense.

This Article addresses the two possible readings of Twombly and Iqbal: first, that the decisions are limited to a plaintiff’s civil complaint, and second, that a defendant must also comply with the Supreme Court’s plausibility standard by pleading enough …

Rethinking Extraordinary Circumstances, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

This short essay for Northwestern University Law Review's Colloquy seeks to rationalize the "extraordinary circumstances" doctrine of Rue 60(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The usual rule is that a movant for Rule 60(b)(6) relief must show extraordinary circumstances for that relief. Under the Ackermann rule (so named after the Supreme Court decision that spawned it), courts have held that any extraordinary circumstances cannot have been caused by the movant's own litigation conduct. I argue that the Ackermann rule, at its broadest, would be unjust to those litigants most in need of Rule 60(b)(6) relief and would overserve …

Is Legality Political?, Frederick Schauer

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

On Removal Jurisdiction's Unanimous Consent Requirements, Adam R. Prescott

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Judicial Power And The Inferior Federal Courts: Exploring The Constitutional Vesting Thesis, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Although the Constitution vests the "Judicial Power" of the United States in the Supreme Court and in any inferior courts that Congress establishes, both Congress and the Court have long propounded the traditional view that the inferior courts may be deprived cognizance of some of the cases and controversies that fall within that power. Is this view fully consonant with the history and text of Article III? One possible reading of those sources suggests that the Constitution vests the full Judicial Power of the United States in the inferior federal courts, directly extending to them jurisdiction over matters that Congress …

Responding To The Loss Of An En Banc Quorum (Update: Prawfsblawg Gets Results!?), Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Deferring To Agency Amicus Briefs That Present New Guidance, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Waiting For Davis V. United States -- Or Not Waiting, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Did The Supreme Court Recently Exercise A Power That Had Lain Dormant For Decades?, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

At&T V. Concepcion And Adherence To Minority Views, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

At&T'S Long Game On Unconscionability, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

A Moral Rights Theory Of Private Law, Andrew S. Gold

William & Mary Law Review

Private law—the law of torts, contracts, and property—is at an interpretive impasse. The two leading conceptual theories of private law—corrective justice and civil recourse theories—both suffer from significant weaknesses. Given these concerns, private law may even seem incoherent. The problem is not insurmountable, however. This Article offers a new way to understand private law. I will argue that private law is best understood as a means for individuals to exercise their moral enforcement rights.

Moral enforcement rights exist when an individual may legitimately use coercion to force another individual to comply with his or her moral duties. Not all interpersonal …

Plausibility Pleading Employment Discrimination, Charles A. Sullivan

William & Mary Law Review

The Supreme Court’s unanimous 2002 decision in Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., which took a very permissive approach to pleading discrimination claims, may or may not remain good law after Ashcroft v. Iqbal. As is well known, Iqbal took a restrictive approach to pleading generally under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and its application to employment discrimination cases could pose serious problems for plaintiffs attempting to get into federal court. In addition, there is certainly a tension between Swierkiewicz and Iqbal. This is in part because the former is a strong reaffirmation of notice pleading as it has traditionally been …

The Preservation Obligation: Regulating And Sanctioning Pre-Litigation Spoliation In Federal Court, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

The issue of discovery misconduct, specifically as it pertains to the prelitigation duty to preserve and sanctions for spoliation, has garnered much attention in the wake of decisions by two prominent jurists whose voices carry great weight in this area. In Pension Committee of University of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of America Securities LLC, Judge Shira A. Scheindlin-of the Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC2 e-discovery casespenned a scholarly and thorough opinion setting forth her views regarding the triggering of the duty to preserve potentially relevant information pending litigation and the standards for determining the appropriate sanctions for various breaches …

Global Civil Procedure Trends In The Twenty-First Century, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

Recent scholarship in comparative civil procedure has identified
“American exceptionalism” as a way to describe practices which set the
United States apart from most of the world, particularly the civil law world.
This Article focuses on two areas of “exceptionalism”: pleading standards
and the role of judges. Specifically, pleading requirements are considerably
less strict in the United States compared to other countries. Additionally,
U.S. judges are less active in conducting litigation than their counterparts
elsewhere, especially judges in the civil law tradition. This Article traces
some modern trends toward convergence between the United States and
the rest of the world. …

Erie’S Suppressed Premise, Michael S. Green

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.