Civil Procedure Commons^™

God, Gaia, The Taxpayer, And The Lorax: Standing, Justiciability, And Separation Of Powers After Massachusetts And Hein, Jonathan H. Adler

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court considered standing in two high-profile cases during the October 2006 term: Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation and Massachusetts v. EPA. Both were 5-4 decisions in which the Court decided along traditional, ideological lines, and both decisions may provide an indication of the future direction of the Supreme Court.

In Hein, a five-Justice majority denied taxpayer standing to challenge the Bush Administration's so-called "faith-based initiatives" as a violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. In Massachusetts, the Court broke new ground as it took several steps in a decidedly "liberal" direction. The five Justice …

In Search Of Removal Jurisdiction, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

The ubiquitous and somewhat careless use of the term “jurisdictional” by courts has spawned confusion over what is and is not jurisdictional in a variety of contexts, including removal. The issue has critical implications for litigants. Yet it lacks scholarly coverage and is the subject of deep divisions in the lower courts. In this article, I develop an initial framework for tackling the jurisdictional/procedural characterization issues of the removal statute. I build upon the groundwork laid by prior precedent and modify it to account for the quasi-jurisdictional nature of removal and its impact on the federal-state balance of power. I …

The Challenge Of Comparative Civil Procedure, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

This Essay reviews Civil Litigation in Comparative Context (West 2007), by Oscar G. Chase, Helen Hershkoff, Linda Silberman, Yasuhei Taniguchi, Vincenzo Varano, and Adrian Zuckerman. It also identifies some areas of exceptionalist American civil procedure that recently have been converging towards global norms and argues that those convergences, if they continue, could render comparative studies particularly meaningful.

Anti-Federalist Procedure, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

"[T]he new federal government will ... be disinclined to invade the rights of the individual States, or the prerogatives of their governments."

"[T]he Constitution of the United States ... recognizes and preserves the autonomy and independence of the States-independence in their legislative and independence in their judicial departments. . . . Any interference with either, except as [constitutionally] permitted, is an invasion of the authority of the State and, to that extent, a denial of its independence."

The understanding expressed by these opening quotes-that the national government was designed to be one of limited powers that would refrain from encroaching …

The Forum Defendant Rule In Arkansas, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

Section 1441(b) of the removal statute prohibits removal of a diversity case if a defendant is a citizen of the state in which the case was originally filed. The bar to removal is known as the Forum Defendant Rule. Is removal in violation of the Forum Defendant Rule a jurisdictional or nonjurisdictional defect? The characterization matters because a jurisdictional defect can be raised at any time, while a nonjurisdictional defect must be raised within a specific period of time or is waived. The Supreme Court has not resolved the characterization, but a number of circuit courts, including the Eighth Circuit, …

Pleading Standards After Bell Atlantic Corp. V. Twombly, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

On May 21, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly and gutted the venerable language from Conley v. Gibson that every civil procedure professor and student can recite almost by heart: that “a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitled him to relief.” This Essay explains how Bell Atlantic did so and discusses some of its implications for pleading claims in the future.

Continuing Violations Doctrine, Kyle Graham

Faculty Publications

It has been intimated that the uncertainty surrounding the continuing violations doctrine owes to a failure to grasp its origins and modem-day contours. This article treats this assertion as true, and tries to dispel at least some of this confusion. Toward this purpose, this article charts the conceptual landscape of this theory and explains how and why the doctrine has been and should be applied.

This analysis begins with the recognition of and distinction between two types of continuing violations. Though frequently confused or conflated, these two approaches are in fact quite different in both purpose and effect. The first …

Jurisdiction To Adjudicate: A Revised Analysis, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Personal jurisdiction doctrine as articulated by the Supreme Court is in disarray. As a constitutional doctrine whose contours remain imprecise, the law of personal jurisdiction has generated confusion, unpredictability, and extensive satellite litigation over what should be an uncomplicated preliminary issue. Many commentators have long lamented these defects, making suggestions for how the doctrine could be improved. Although many of these proposals have had much to offer, they generally have failed to articulate (or adequately justify or explain) a simple and sound approach to jurisdiction that the Supreme Court can embrace. This Article revises the law of personal jurisdiction by …

Subclassing, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

This Article is the first to take a hard look at Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(4)(B), an oft-slighted part of the class action scheme that permits a court to create subclasses "when appropriate." Despite its tautologically unhelpful text, no other court or commentator has undertaken a comprehensive analysis of this provision. The time to do so is certainly now. As class actions grow bigger, plaintiffs seek new ways to meet Rule 23 "s certification requirements. Just in the last few years, plaintiffs have turned to subclassing's sister provision, Rule 23(c)(4)(A), which has consequently received a flurry of commentary from …

Law, Ideology, And Strategy In Judicial Decision Making: Evidence From Securities Fraud Actions, Michael A. Perino

Faculty Publications

Legal academics and political scientists continue to debate whether the legal, attitudinal, or strategic model best explains judicial decision making. One limitation in this debate is the high-court bias found in most studies. This article, by contrast, examines federal district court decisions, specifically interpretations of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Initial interpretations of the Act articulated distinct liberal and conservative positions. The data compiled here support the hypothesis that the later emergence of an intermediate interpretation was the result of strategic statutory interpretation rather than simply judges acting consistently with their ideological preferences, although there is some …

Trial Trends And Implications For The Civil Justice System, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Robert C. Lafountain, Shauna Strickland

Faculty Publications

Bench and jury trials have been declining steadily for the past twenty years, both in absolute numbers and as a proportion of civil dispositions. This “vanishing trial” phenomenon was long suspected by many within the state court system, but has only recently been empirically confirmed. This issue of Caseload Highlights focuses on trends in civil trial characteristics and discusses possible causes of these trends and their implications for practitioners and policy-makers in state courts.

This abstract has been taken from the body of the report.

Like Migratory Birds- Latin American Claimants In U.S. Courts And The Ford-Firestone Rollover Litigation, Manuel A. Gómez

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Terminating Calder: "Effects" Based Jurisdiction In The Ninth Circuit After Schwarzenegger V. Fred Martin Motor Co., A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

In Calder v. Jones, the Supreme Court clearly and succinctly determined that personal jurisdiction is appropriate over a defendant whose only contact with the forum state is its intentional actions aimed at and having harmful "effects" in the forum state. Illustrating the extent to which the law of personal jurisdiction had been relaxed from the time of Pennoyer v. Neff and International Shoe Co. v. Washington, Calder also extended the reach of state courts by permitting jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants on the strength of the plaintiffs' connections with the forum state. Although Calder provided a welcome and much …

Did The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act Work?, Michael A. Perino

Faculty Publications

In 1995 Congress passed the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (the PSLRA or the Act) to address abuses in securities fraud class actions. In the wake of Enron, WorldCom, Adelphia, and other high profile securities frauds, critics suggest that the law made it too easy to escape liability for securities fraud and thus created a climate in which frauds are more likely to occur. Others claim that the Act has largely failed because it did little to deter plaintiffs' lawyers from filing nonmeritorious cases. This article employs a database of the 1449 class actions filed from 1996 through 2001 to …

Civil Rights Plaintiffs And John Doe Defendants: A Study In § 1983 Procedure, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Due Process Erosion: The Diminution Of Live Testimony At The Icty, Megan A. Fairlie

Faculty Publications

Shortly after its creation in 1993, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) adopted an adversarial construct and advocated a preference for the presentation of direct evidence, or live witness testimony, in its criminal trials. In the wake of that decision and under considerable pressure to expedite its proceedings, the ICTY judges responded with efforts to streamline the trial process, amending the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence so as to incrementally increase the admissibility of written evidence. This article tracks the relevant rule changes and questions the merit of the decision to move away from live testimony. …

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 …

Pleading Rules In Antitrust Cases: A Return To Fact Pleading?, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, adopted in 1938, introduced a simplified pleading regimen for litigation in the federal courts. Commonly referred to as notice pleading, this new pleading regimen was designed to shift the courts' attention away from the pleadings and toward proof at trial. Under the simplified pleading standards adopted by the Federal Rules, the complaint need not contain a ritualistic recitation of elements of an abstruse theory of recovery, as required at common law; nor did it need to detail "facts" sufficient to make out a "cause of action," as required under the old scheme of …

The Supreme Court's Backwards Proportionaility Jurisprudence: Comparing Judicial Review Of Excessive Criminal Punishments And Excessive Punitive Damages Award, Adam M. Gershowitz

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Hindsight Bias And Tort Liability: Avoiding Premature Conclusions, Philip G. Peters Jr.

Faculty Publications

Cognitive psychologists know that judgments made in hindsight are distorted by two cognitive heuristics-hindsight bias and outcome bias. Hindsight bias makes bad outcomes seem more predictable in hindsight than they were ex ante. Outcome bias induces us to assume that people who cause accidents have been careless. Because of these biases, individuals who know that a bad outcome has occurred tend to evaluate prior conduct more harshly than they would if they were unaware of the actual outcome. In negligence actions, defendants are supposed to be judged by the reasonableness of their conduct, not by its outcome. Jurors are asked …

Discovery In International Legal Developments Year In Review: 1998, Christopher J. Borgen

Faculty Publications

American procedure regarding international discovery stems from 28 U.S.C. §§ 1781-1783, and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, in particular Rule 28(b). The leading case on the topic of international discovery is the Supreme Court's decision in Société Nationale Industielle Aerospatiale v. United States District Court. Many later cases base their reasoning on interpretations of Aerospatiale. This article is a brief review of developments during the year.

Creating The 'Portable' Guardianship: Legal And Practical Implications Of Probate Court Cooperation In Interstate Guardianship Cases, Charlene D. Daniel, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

In this article, we discuss the legal and practical issues associ­ated with interstate guardianships--that is, those guardianships in which the ward has ties to more than one state. Part I addresses these issues in the context of jurisdictional questions, securing nec­essary information, judicial monitoring and enforcement of guardi­anship orders, and property management. Part II proposes some modest solutions to these problems, many borrowed from other ar­eas of law (e.g., child support enforcement, child custody determinations, enforcement of civil protection orders, involuntary civil commitment).

This abstract has been taken from the authors' introduction.

The Arizona Jury Reform Permitting Civil Jury Trial Discussions: The Views Of Trial Participants, Judges, And Jurors, Valerie P. Hans, Paula Hannaford-Agor, G. Thomas Munsterman

Faculty Publications

In 1995, the Arizona Supreme Court reformed the jury trial process by allowing civil jurors to discuss the evidence presented during trial prior to their formal deliberations. This Article examines and evaluates the theoretical, legal, and policy issues raised by this reform and presents the early results of a field experiment that tested the impact of trial discussions. Jurors, judges, attorneys, and litigants in civil jury trials in Arizona were questioned regarding their observations, experi­ences, and reactions during trial as well as what they perceived to be the benefits and drawbacks of juror discussions. The data revealed that the majority …

Desert, Utility, And Minimum Contacts: Toward A Mixed Theory Of Personal Jurisdiction, Kevin C. Mcmunigal

Faculty Publications

In this Essay, I suggest several steps to improve the Supreme Court's approach to minimum contacts analysis. Though they necessitate some modification of current doctrine, these steps require neither radical alteration of the test's current factors nor abandonment of any of its purposes. I propose a new way of looking at the Court's minimum contacts analysis that better explains and integrates the factors, temporal perspectives, and purposes that presently figure in the analysis. My approach draws on criminal law, analogizing a state's imposition of the burdens of jurisdiction to its imposition of a criminal sanction. It sees the minimum contacts …

Fraud And Federalism: Preempting Private State Securities Fraud Causes Of Action, Michael A. Perino

Faculty Publications

The passage of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 has engendered a significant forum shift in class action securities fraud litigation, from federal to state court. This unintended by-product of the Act has reignited debate over our dual federal-state system of securities regulation and in turn has inspired a discussion as to whether Congress should now preempt state securities fraud causes of action. This article argues that preemption is an appropriate, but not the only, solution to these concerns. To support this argument, this article first traces the history of dual state-federal securities regulation within the context of …

Discovery In International Legal Developments Year In Review: 1997, Christopher J. Borgen

Faculty Publications

U.S. law provides litigants with a variety of means to obtain evidence from foreign jurisdictions. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (the Federal Rules) and rules of state courts may be used if a U.S. court has jurisdiction over the person who is in control of the evidence in question. Section 1783 of tide 28 of the United States Code provides a means for serving a subpoena on U.S. nationals or residents abroad. Litigants may also obtain foreign discovery through letters rogatory as permitted by 28 U.S.C. § 1781 and treaties such as the Hague Convention on Taking Evidence (the …

How Judges View Civil Juries, Paula Hannaford-Agor, B. Michael Dann, G. Thomas Munsterman

Faculty Publications

In any given case, the judge's view of the jury may mani­fest itself as a complex and subtle mixture of respect, gratitude, con­cern, pride, impatience, and even frustration. But more revealing than what judges say about juries is what judges do to prepare jurors for their roles in civil cases. This paper explores the various indicators of judges' views of the civil jury, including the social and institutional factors and contemporary jury reform efforts that affect judges' views about the civil jury.

This abstract has been taken from the authors' introduction.

Discovery In International Legal Developments Year In Review: 1996, Christopher J. Borgen

Faculty Publications

American procedure regarding international discovery stems from 28 U.S.C. §§ 1781-83, and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP or Rule) 28(b). Broadly speaking, these rules are concerned with the mechanics of assessing requests for discovery in the United States to assist a proceeding in a foreign country and attempts by one or more parties before a U.S. court to obtain evidence located in another country. This article serves as a brief review of developments during the year.

Class Action Chaos? The Theory Of The Core And An Analysis Of Opt-Out Rights In Mass Tort Class Actions, Michael A. Perino

Faculty Publications

From breast implants to cigarettes, mass tort class actions are a prominent and controversial part of the contemporary litigation landscape. A critical component of these actions is the ability of class members to “opt out” and thereby exclude themselves from the effect of any class judgment. The tension between individual autonomy and the desire for global resolution of mass controversies has led to an intense debate concerning the circumstances under which opt-out rights should be constrained, if at all.

This Article makes five distinct contributions to the class action literature. First, the Article applies the game theoretic concept of the …

Whoever Fights Monsters Should See To It That In The Process He Does Not Become A Monster: Hunting The Sexual Predator With Silver Bullets -- Federal Rules Of Evidence 413-415 -- And A Stake Through The Heart -- Kansas V. Hendricks, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.