Civil Procedure Commons^™

Reframing The Dilemma Of Contractually Expanded Judicial Review: Arbitral Appeal Vs. Vacatur , Eric Van Ginkel

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

The Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA") of 1925 was created to ensure enforceability of agreements to arbitrate. The FAA is the centerpiece of the federal arbitration policy as construed by the Supreme Court. Section 10(a) FAA enumerates grounds on which an arbitral award can be set aside. The central issue discussed herein is whether parties can agree by contract to allow one of the parties to initiate review of the arbitral award by a court that would otherwise have jurisdiction over those parties, or whether the court's powers are somehow limited to the grounds for vacatur enumerated in Section 10(a) FAA. …

Summary Of Mountain View Hospital V. Dist. Ct., 128 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 17, Kendra Kisling

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered petitions for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenging the district court’s denial of a motion to dismiss a medical malpractice action for the plaintiffs’ failure to comply with NRS 41A.071.

Modern Odysseus Or Classic Fraud - Fourteen Years In Prison For Civil Contempt Without A Jury Trial, Judicial Power Without Limitation, And An Examination Of The Failure Of Due Process, Mitchell J. Frank

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Remodeling The Multi-Door Courthouse To "Fit The Forum To The Folks": How Screening And Preparation Will Enhance Adr, Tim Hedeen

Faculty Articles

The article offers information on remodeling of multi-door courthouse to enhance Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) efficiency. It informs that symposium, The Future of Court ADR: Mediation and Beyond that was held in September 2011 featured scholars and practitioners to discuss the past and future of ADR. It informs that research and practice in mediation have deepened the understanding in engaging with prospective clients.

Twombly And Iqbal Reconsidered, Brian T. Fitzpatrick

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the Supreme Court reinterpreted the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to permit judges to dismiss claims at the very outset of a case whenever they think the claims are implausible. The decisions have been extremely controversial, and they are already on track to become the most cited Supreme Court decisions of all time. Critics contend that the decisions are prime examples of the “conservative judicial activism” widely attributed to the Roberts Court. In particular, critics contend that the decisions circumvented the usual process for promulgating amendments to the Federal Rules …

Is Spam The Rock Of Sisyphus?: Whether The Can-Spam Act And Its Global Counterparts Will Delete Your E-Mail, Amy G. Marino

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Law Day Fifth District Court Of Appeal Oral Arguments At Florida A&M University College Of Law, 2012, Honorable Richard B. Orfinger, Chief Judge, Honorable William D. Palmer Chief Judge, Honorable Jay P. Cohen

Law Day Presentations

As part of Law Day activities, the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal is holding a session in the FAMU College of Law Ceremonial Moot Courtroom. A three judge panel is hearing oral arguments from attorneys representing their clients in cases involving appellant's fraud on the trial court, public records questions, attorney's fees, and jurisdiction. A question-and-answer session follows each set of arguments during which the justices and attorneys entertain questions about the appellate process and organization of the court.

Georgia's New Evidence Code - An Overview, Paul S. Milich

Georgia State University Law Review

On May 3, 2011, Governor Nathan Deal signed into law House Bill 24 (HB 24) bringing a new set of evidence rules to the State of Georgia.

The new rules went into effect on January 1, 2013. The author of this article was the Reporter for the State Bar Evidence Study Committee when new rules were first proposed back in the mid-1980s, and again throughout the recent, successful effort to reform the rules.

Part I of this article will give a brief history of the twenty-six-year effort to bring new evidence rules to Georgia. Part II will provide a structural …

"Expanded" Judicial Review Revisited: Kyocera Overturns Lapine, Eric Van Ginkel

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Just when you thought you could validly add a clause to your client's arbitration agreement providing that the losing party may take an appeal from the award to the district court having jurisdiction over the parties, think again. What was the law of the Ninth Circuit since December 1997, when a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decided LaPine Technology Corporation v. Kyocera Corporation ("LaPine I"), has just been reversed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sitting en banc. In its decision, on a rehearing of what the court refers to as " …

A Secret In One District Is No Secret In Another: The Cases Of Merrill Lynch And Preliminary Injunctions Under The Faa , Anahit Tagvoryan

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Public policy favors protecting intellectual property in arbitration, and both Congress and the courts support, and in fact encourage, arbitration of intellectual property disputes. This support stems from the history of favoritism toward private arbitration agreements and other alternative dispute resolution in lieu of judicial adjudication. Because intellectual property disputes often involve commercial parties transacting business across state lines, arbitration is governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). Availability of provisional remedies such as injunctions has also proven effective in the area of intellectual property disputes. However, unlike the option and process of private arbitration where there is little to …

Mediation By Judges: A New Phenomenon In The Transformation Of Justice , Louise Otis, Eric H. Reiter

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article has three principal parts. In the first, we present an overview of judicial mediation and how it responds to some of the perceived problems with the classical model of adjudication. In this analysis, we draw especially on the experience with judicial mediation at the appellate level at the Quebec Court of Appeal. In the second part, we examine the unfolding of the mediation process itself, using an annotated guide to judicial mediation to address broader issues of both practical and theoretical concern. In the third part, we consider the crucial question of ethics in mediation, signaling some of …

Alternative Dispute Resolution And Court-Appointed Experts , Joseph R. Slights Iii, Mark G. Haug

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article shamelessly borrows its subtitles-the Court's Tale and the Expert's Tale-from Chaucer's tale-telling. The two tales examine the life cycle of a case utilizing a court-appointed expert. The Court's Tale begins with a presumption against the court-appointed expert. Certain characteristics of a dispute, however, may be sufficient to rebut this presumption. The Court's Tale tells of one such case. The case involved complex damage calculations and irreconcilable positions that invite an objective analysis. The article then turns toward the Expert's Tale which describes how an expert helped resolve the problem. Following the Expert's Tale, the court assesses the outcome …

Exxon Mobil Corp. V. Allapattah Services, Inc.: The Wrath Of Zahn. The Supreme Court's Requiem For "Sympathetic Textualism", Gunnar Gundersen

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Carstarphen V. Milsner, 128 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 5, Richard A. Andrews

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a district court order denying a motion for a preferential trial date in a corporation action.

California's Opportunity To Create Historical Precedent Regarding A Mediated Settlement Agreement's Effect On Mediation Confidentiality And Arbitrability , Susan Nauss Exon

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Confidentiality serves as a cornerstone of mediation. The public policy underlying confidentiality is the promotion of candid communications between disputing parties. As explained in this article, mediation confidentiality affects more than just communication. It affects other important mediation values, such as party self-determination and mediator impartiality. Mediation confidentiality affects parties' ability to enforce their mediated agreements. Finally, confidentiality affects multiple dispute resolution processes, as seen by the interrelated nature of mediation and arbitration in the seminal case of Fair v. Bakhtiari.

Compulsory Pre-Dispute Arbitration Clauses In The Employment Context After Eeoc V. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps , Maria Wusinich

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

In EEOC v. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps, decided in 2003, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals aligned its view with its sister circuits and with the Supreme Court regarding the enforceability of arbitration agreements in employment discrimination cases. The court held that an employee's agreement to arbitrate a claim arising under federal anti-discrimination law is enforceable. At first glance, it would appear that as far as the judicial branch is concerned, the longstanding issue of the validity of mandatory arbitration agreements in the employment context is now settled. This article, in contrast, posits that the courts will be …

Unraveling The Mystery Of Wilko V. Swan: American Arbitration Vacatur Law And The Accidental Demise Of Party Autonomy , James M. Gaitis

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article begins with a brief description of what the Wilko Court said with respect to the vacatur of arbitral awards and how federal and state appellate courts have construed that language. Traditional American arbitration vacatur law, including but not limited to the cases relied upon by the Wilko Court, are then reviewed in depth such that the Wilko decision and the Wilko Court's choice of language may be placed in context and fully examined. The intent and proper operation of the FAA are then discussed based on both the legislative history of the FAA and other authorities that consistently …

International Arbitral Appeals: What Are We So Afraid Of? , Erin E. Gleason

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article will explore the advantages of instituting appellate mechanisms in investor-state disputes and international commercial arbitration. Part II begins with a review of the WTO Appellate Body's development and workings, followed by an analysis of other appellate procedures for international trade law arbitration, including the MERCOSUR system's Permanent Court and the Grain and Feed Trade Association's appeals process. Part III examines the current methods for reviewing investor-state arbitration awards under ICSID and NAFTA. Part III goes on to advocate for the creation of an Appeals Facility, separate from current arbitral institutions, which would be empowered to hear appeals in …

Is Three A Crowd? Neutrality, Partiality And Partisanship In The Context Of Tripartite Arbitrations , David J. Mclean, Sean-Patrick Wilson

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This paper will discuss issues surrounding party-appointed arbitrators on tripartite panels and will attempt to offer practical observations about what parties can expect under the tripartite system.

When Staying Discovery Stays Justice: Analyzing Motions To Stay Discovery When A Motion To Dismiss Is Pending, Kevin J. Lynch

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

Due to the important costs and benefits of discovery, decisions that affect the scope, timing, or availability of discovery are enormously consequential. For civil litigation in federal court, district and magistrate judges make many decisions about discovery that affect the cases before them. They decide the length and number of depositions that may be taken, compel or protect against the production of large numbers of documents and electronic data searches, serve as gatekeepers for expert witness testimony, and even decide whether the parties may take discovery at all until any motions to dismiss have been resolved. This Article focuses squarely …

Discernable Differences: A Survey Of Civil Jury Demands, M. Michelle Dunning

Washington Law Review

Under Washington State’s historic default rules, the civil jury consisted of twelve persons unless both parties expressly consented to a “less number.” The Washington Legislature reversed this presumption in 1972. Washington’s civil jury now consists of six persons, unless one of the parties files a specific demand for twelve. It appears, however, that litigants have refused to embrace this change; a survey of 2883 civil jury demands filed in King County Superior Court in 2009 to 2010 demonstrates that litigants overwhelmingly prefer twelve-member juries. This paper presents this survey’s results and explores what they might mean, positing seven considerations that …

The Jury's Second Coming, Jenny E. Carroll

Faculty Scholarship

This article explores the controversial issue of jury nullification by reconceptualizing nullification through the lens of the Supreme Court’s recent decisions beginning with Apprendi v. New Jersey. Apprendi’s embrace of the jury’s historical powers — require a rejection of the formalized and static paradigm in favor of a more fluid vision of the law. Despite extensive scholarship surrounding Apprendi, an innovative (though admittedly counter-intuitive) reading of the case line has been overlooked. This reading draws on Apprendi’s embrace of a vision of the law constructed and completed through jury interpretation and verdict. Interpreted in this way, the Apprendi case line …

Applying The Stored Communications Act To The Civil Discovery Of Social Networking Sites, Rudolph J. Burshnic

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Procedural Due Process And Predictable Punitive Damage Awards, Jill Wieber Lens

BYU Law Review

In Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, the Supreme Court’s most recent opinion on punitive damage awards, the Court declared that the real problem with punitive damage awards is their “stark unpredictability.” The Court abandoned all hope that common law jury instructions could produce predictable punitive damage awards. Instead, the Court suggested pegging punitive damage awards to compensatory damage awards. So far, analysis of the opinion has been minimal, likely due to the purported maritime law basis of the holding. Exxon should not be overlooked, however, as it signals a resurgence of procedural due process as a basis for challenging punitive …

Standing Of Intervenor-Defendants In Public Law Litigation, Matthew I. Hall

Scholarly Works

Unless the plaintiff has a personal stake in the outcome, Article III of the United States Constitution requires federal courts to dismiss a plaintiff’s claim for lack of standing. That much is clearly established by decades of precedent. Less understood, however, is the degree to which Article III also requires defendants to possess a personal stake. The significance of defendant standing often goes unnoticed in case law and scholarship, because the standing of the defendant in most lawsuits is readily apparent:any defendant against whom the plaintiff seeks a remedy has a personal interest in defending against the plaintiff’s claim.

But …