Civil Procedure Commons^™

Helfstein V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 91 (Dec. 3, 2015), Heather Caliguire

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court determined that the six-month deadline to set aside a voluntary dismissal or settlement agreement found within NRCP 60(b) could not be extended, despite an allegation of fraud.

D.R. Horton, Inc. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct, 131 Nev., Adv. Op. 86 (October 29, 2015), Brandonn Grossman

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court considered a Petitioner home builder’s petition for writ relief and appeal of a district court order granting Respondent HOA’s ex parte motion for a stay and enlargement of time for service pursuant to NRS 40.647(2)(b). Ruling on Petitioner’s two writ petitions, the Court held the district court’s grant of a stay was not in error and the NRCP 41(e) five-year limitation period was tolled under the Boren exception to NRCP 41(e). Accordingly, the Court denied both writ petitions.

Joanna T. V. Nevada, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 77 (Sep 24, 2015), Audra Powell

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The court considered whether NRCP 4(i)’s 120 day requirement for service of a summons applied to cases filed under NRS § 432B, for protection of children from neglect and abuse. The court held that the 120 day requirement does not apply to cases filed under 432B and denied the petition for a writ of mandamus to order the juvenile court to dismiss an abuse-and-neglect petition on that premise.

Sanders V. Sears-Page, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 50, Scott Lundy

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court held that the district court erred in deciding not to strike an empaneled juror whose background implied bias, but who promised he could remain impartial. Moreover, the Court held the district court erred in allowing challenges for cause while the juror was present, and by allowing newly discovered evidence to be entered into evidence on the final day of trial.

Summary Of Nutton V. Sunset Station, Inc., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 34 (June 11, 2015), Joseph Meissner

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined the proper relationship between NRCP 15(a) and NRCP 16(b), and explored whether a proposed amendment under NRCP 15(a) can be deemed “futile” because it is unsupported by, or contradicts, factual evidence produced during discovery.

An Appeal To Common Sense: Why "Unappealable" District Court Decisions Should Be Subject To Appellate Review, Matthew D. Heins

Northwestern University Law Review

28 U.S.C. § 1291 vests jurisdiction in the United States Circuit Courts of Appeal to hear “appeals from all final decisions of the district courts of the United States.” Various circuit courts have, however, determined that they may only hear appeals of final “judicial” decisions, and that they do not have jurisdiction to hear appeals from final decisions of United States district courts if those decisions are “administrative.” Circuit courts have been loath to explicitly define the dividing line between the two classes of case, and have frequently invoked the potential availability of mandamus review as a means of placating …

The Dynamic Allocation Of Burden Doctrine As A Mitigation Of The Undesirable Effects Of Iqbal’S Pleading Standard, Nicolás J. Frías Ossandón

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supplemental Standing For Severability, Erik R. Zimmerman

Northwestern University Law Review

The Supreme Court has recently insisted that plaintiffs must have standing for every claim that they raise. But this claim-specific approach to standing is at odds with established practice in several contexts, including rulings on the severability of statutes. Courts often permit plaintiffs to claim that statutory provisions should be invalidated pursuant to severability doctrine, without requiring that they have standing for those claims. This Article argues that existing practice for severability is a form of “supplemental standing.” Supplemental standing is analogous to supplemental jurisdiction. It allows a plaintiff with standing for one claim to raise related claims, even if …

I Like To Move It, Move It: Partialvenue Transfer For Less Than A Fulllegal Action, Krystal Brunner Swendsboe

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Proportionality, Pretrial Confidentiality, And Discovery Sharing, Dustin B. Benham

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Federal Rules At 75: Dispute Resolution, Private Enforcement Or Decisions According To Law?, James R. Maxeiner

Georgia State University Law Review

This essay is a critical response to the 2013 commemorations of the75th anniversary of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were introduced in 1938 to provide procedure to decide cases on their merits. The Rules were designed to replace decisions under the “sporting theory of justice”with decisions according to law.

By 1976, at midlife, it was clear that they were not achieving their goal. America’s proceduralists split into two sides about what to do. One side promotes rules that control and conclude litigation: e.g.,plausibility pleading, case management, limited discovery, cost indemnity for discovery, and summary …

Specificity Or Dismissal: The Improper Extension Of Rule 9(B) To Negligent Misrepresentation As A Deprivation Of Plaintiffs’ Procedural Due Process Rights, Julie A. Cook

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Waiving The Duty To Mitigate In Commercial Leases, Jacqueline Sandler

William & Mary Business Law Review

This Note examines a largely unexplored consequence of jurisdictions adopting a default duty to mitigate for commercial leases: whether a contract provision waiving the duty should be enforced. Only a few courts across the country have addressed the waiver issue in a commercial setting. At least two different appeals courts have enforced a waiver clause and claim that public policy supports their decision. In contrast, a federal court has stated the opposite—that public policy demands waiver provisions be void. Another state has outright voided all waiver clauses by statute. Courts that have enforced waivers have asserted that commercial parties have …

Recent Reforms In Eu Law: Recognition And Enforcement Of Judgments, Samuel P. Baumgartner

Akron Law Faculty Publications

The European Union has just adopted a set of amendments to the Brussels I Regulation, which governs jurisdiction to adjudicate, parallel proceedings, and the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. This article discusses the Regulation and the adopted amendments regarding the recognition and enforcement of judgments and argues that these amendments are part of a deeper set of structural and conceptual changes in the law of transnational litigation in the European Union over the last two decades. The article concludes with an analysis of both the amendments and the underlying changes for litigants and law reformers in the United States, …

Trial Jurors And Variables Influencing Why They Return The Verdicts They Do - A Guide For Practicing And Future Trial Attorneys, Mitchell J. Frank, Osvaldo F. Morera

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Understanding The Obstacles To The Recognition And Enforcement Of U.S. Judgments Abroad, Samuel P. Baumgartner

Akron Law Faculty Publications

Questions of recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments have entered center stage. Recent empirical work suggests that there has been a marked increase in the frequency with which U.S. courts are asked to recognize and enforce foreign judgments. The U.S. litigation surrounding a multibillion-dollar Ecuadoran judgment against Chevron indicates that the stakes in some of these cases can be high indeed. This rising importance of questions of judgments recognition has not been lost on lawmakers. In November of 2011, the Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law of the U.S. House of Representatives’ Judiciary Committee held hearings on whether to …

California Practicum: A Guide To Coordination Of Civil Actions In California, Darren L. Brooks

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Scientific Evidence In The Age Of Daubert: A Proposal For A Dual Standard Of Admissibility In Civil And Criminal Cases , William P. Haney Iii

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Toward A Balanced Approach To "Frivolous" Litigation: A Critical Review Of Federal Rule 11 And State Sanctions Provisions , Byron C. Keeling

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Populism, Politics, And Procedure: The Saga Of Summary Judgment And The Rulemaking Process In California, Glenn S. Koppel

Pepperdine Law Review

The California Constitution gives the primary power to promulgate rules of civil procedure for the state courts to the legislature and the people, leaving the state’s Judicial Council with residual, or secondary, authority to adopt rules of procedure and court administration “when and where the higher authority of the Legislature and the people has not been exercised.” This Article demonstrates how this legislative rulemaking process, referred to herein as “legislative primacy,” does not work because, as of the writing of this article in 1997, it produced ineffective statutory summary judgment law.

Hypothetical Jurisdiction And Interjurisdictional Preclusion: A "Comity" Of Errors, Ely Todd Chayet

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ashcroft V. Iqbal: Contempt For Rules, Statutes, The Constitution, And Elemental Fairness, Steve Subrin

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. V. Shute: The Titanic Of Worst Decisions, Linda S. Mullenix

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Tending To Potted Plants: The Professional Identity Vacuum In Garcetti V. Ceballos, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

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.

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 …

A Reflection On American Justice At A Crossroads: A Public And Private Crisis, Maureen A. Weston

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

In April, 2010, a prominent group of judges, attorneys, academics, private dispute resolution professionals, and policymakers gathered to reflect upon the current state and future of the American justice system. A symposium entitled American Justice at a Crossroads: A Public and Private Crisis was held at Pepperdine University School of Law under the joint sponsorship of the Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution, the Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal, and the International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR Institute). This special symposium edition of the Journal is comprised of select papers and speeches presented at that event and provide thoughtful …

Economical Litigation Agreements: The "Civil Litigation Prenup" Need, Basis, And Enforceability , Daniel B. Winslow, Alexandra Bedell-Healy

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article identifies the basis and limits of the parties' abilities to define and enforce discovery in an ex ante contract. Despite the deficiencies of litigation, the free, public dispute resolution forum of the civil justice system provides significant value in commercial disputes. That value can be used to maximum mutual advantage only if parties replace the infinite discovery permitted in conventional litigation with the finite discovery contracted in Economical Litigation Agreement (ELA) litigation. This article will help parties to understand the benefit and enforceability of the ELA.

Getting To Yes In Specialized Courts: The Unique Role Of Adr In Business Court Cases, Bejamin F. Tennille, Lee Applebaum, Anne Tucker Nees

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

The assumed compatibility between ADR and specialized courts is largely unexamined. Without being able to statistically validate the motivations and preferences of individual disputants in a manner to draw generalized conclusions, this article examines the relationship between ADR and specialized business courts by looking at how the two are structurally intertwined through existing procedural rules and implementation practices. Part I of this article describes the foundational structures and concepts behind both ADR and specialized business courts, as well as the similarities and differences between them. Part II explores the existing formal structural relationship between ADR and specialized courts by examining …

Keynote Address: Civil Justice At A Crossroads , Rebecca Love Kourlis

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

I really do believe that, as your title suggests, the civil justice system is at a crossroads and that, as a result, we all have new opportunities and old responsibilities. Four years ago, concerns about skyrocketing costs, unprofessional gamesmanship, and long delays in civil litigation were the stuff of grousing and shoulder shrugs. We all had a level of fatalism or cynicism about our inability to change any of those factors. Now, that is not true. There is a window of opportunity that has opened-a convergence of various forces resulting in a willingness of decision-makers to consider change. As a …