Civil Procedure Commons^™

Summary Judgment: What We Think We Know Versus What We Ought To Know, Brooke D. Coleman

Faculty Articles

The twenty-fifth anniversary of the “trilogy” of summary judgment cases provides a perfect moment to reflect on what summary judgment means to our civil justice system. However, it goes without saying that summary judgment is not one of those procedural topics that has received little attention. Indeed, it is an area of procedure that has produced heated debates, plenty of press, and volumes of law review articles. So, this is not a little-studied area that only gets discussed on these landmark occasions. This leads to the following inquiry: What more can really be written about a topic that appears to …

The Vanishing Plaintiff, Brooke D. Coleman

Faculty Articles

What if restrictive procedural rules kept cases like Bakke v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal., Monell v. Dept. of Soc. Servs., and Hopkins v. Price Waterhouse from making it past a motion to dismiss and on to the Supreme Court? A case like Bakke is well-known for its holding about the use of race in admissions policies. But imagine that Alan Bakke was never able to get his original trial court complaint past a motion to dismiss, through discovery, and on to a final, appealable judgment. While reasonable people can disagree about the merits of Bakke, it …

(Re)Forming The Jury: Detection And Disinfection Of Implicit Juror Bias, Anna Roberts

Faculty Articles

This Article investigates whether one of the most intractable problems in trial procedure can be ameliorated through the use of one of the most striking discoveries in recent social science. The intractable problem is selecting a fair jury. Current doctrine fails to address the fact that jurors harbor not only explicit, or conscious, bias, but also implicit, or unconscious, bias. The discovery is the Implicit Association Test ("IAT"), an online test that aims to reveal implicit bias.

This Article conducts the first comparison of proposals that the IAT be used to address jury bias. They fall into two groups. The …

Disparately Seeking Jurors: Disparate Impact And The (Mis)Use Of Batson, Anna Roberts

Faculty Articles

This Article, "Disparately Seeking Jurors: Disparate Impact and the (Mis)use of Batson," uncovers a stark inequality within Equal Protection jurisprudence. On the 25th Anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Batson v. Kentucky, which established a three-step test for assessing claims of purposeful discrimination in jury selection, I present the first comprehensive research on the application by the lower federal courts of Batson’s disparate impact analysis. The results are striking. Whereas the test was developed to prevent the discriminatory removal of African American jurors from the trials of African Americans, the courts now use disparate impact analysis only to …

An Argument For Uniform E-Discovery Practice In Cross-Border Civil Litigation, Daniel B. Garrie, Daniel K. Gelb

Journal of Business & Technology Law

No abstract provided.

What’S Sovereignty Got To Do With It?: Due Process, Personal Jurisdiction And The Supreme Court, Wendy Collins Perdue

Law Faculty Publications

In this symposium contribution I do two things. First, I explore the relationship between sovereignty and due process in personal jurisdiction in some of the more problematic aspects of the Nicastro opinions. I conclude that, although at one time the concept of sovereignty provided an important analytic component of personal jurisdiction analysis, this is largely no longer true.

Concrete Private Interest In Regulatory Enforcement: Tradable Environmental Resource Rights As A Basis For Standing, Danieli Evans

Articles

This Note proposes a novel solution to standing problems faced by environmental plaintifs seeking to enforce, or to compel agencies to enforce, environmental regulation. It argues that environmental plaintifs should be able to obtain standing to bring an Administrative Procedure Act (APA) review action or a citizen suit based on ownership of private tradable environmental resource rights, created by increasingly popular environmental privatization programs. These rights should operate as a basis for standing even for plaintifs who would otherwise be unable to meet standing requirements of individual injury, causation, and redressability. Relying on tradable rights to environmental resources as a …

Rethinking Voir Dire, Eric R. Carpenter

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Rejecting Sovereign Immunity In Public Law Litigation, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

J.D.B. V. North Carolina: An Appropriate Expansion Of Miranda To Account For Age In Juvenile Interrogations, Hanna M. Sheehan

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court’S Recent Class Action Jurisprudence: Gazing Into A Crystal Ball, Mary Kay Kane

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Private Parties, Legislators, And The Government's Mantle: On Intervention And Article Iii Standing, Suzanne B. Goldberg

Faculty Scholarship

This essay takes up questions regarding whether initiative proponents and legislators can defend a law in federal court when the government declines to defend. Looking first at intervention under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, I argue that neither has the cognizable interest needed to enter an ongoing lawsuit as a party. Yet even if they are allowed to intervene, these would-be defenders of state or federal law cannot take on the government’s mantle to satisfy Article III because the government’s standing derives from the risk to its enforcement powers, which is an interest that cannot be delegated to others. …

Qui Tam: Is False Claims Law A Model For International Law?, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Aggregate Litigation Goes Public: Representative Suits By State Attorneys General, Margaret H. Lemos

Faculty Scholarship

State attorneys general represent their citizens in aggregate litigation that bears a striking resemblance to the much-maligned damages class action. Yet, while class actions are subject to a raft of procedural rules designed to protect absent class members, equivalent suits in the public sphere are largely free from constraint. The procedural disconnect between the two categories of aggregate litigation reflects a widespread assumption that attorneys general will adequately represent the interests of the state’s citizens, obviating any need for case-specific mechanisms for assuring the loyalty of lawyer to client.

This Article challenges the presumption of adequate public representation. By conflating …