Civil Procedure Commons^™

Judges And The Deregulation Of The Lawyer's Monopoly, Jessica Steinberg, Anna E. Carpenter, Colleen F. Shanahan, Alyx Mark

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

In a revolutionary moment for the legal profession, the deregulation of legal services is taking hold in many parts of the country. Utah and Arizona, for instance, are experimenting with new regulations that permit nonlawyer advocates to play an active role in assisting citizens who may not otherwise have access to legal services. In addition, amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct in both states, as well as those being contemplated in California, now allow nonlawyers to have a partnership stake in law firms, which may dramatically change the way capital for the delivery of legal services is raised as …

Jury Bias Resulting In Indefinite Commitment: Expanding Procedural Protections In Svp Civil Commitment Proceedings Under The Mathews Test, Alli M. Mentch

William & Mary Law Review

Twenty states, the District of Columbia, and the federal government have enacted Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) laws that permit the civil commitment of sex offenders. Under these laws, imprisoned sex offenders serving criminal sentences are transferred to treatment facilities and held indefinitely. As one individual describes civil commitment, “It’s worse than prison. In prison I wasn’t happy, but I was content because I knew I had a release date.” An estimated 5,400 individuals are currently civilly committed under these laws.

This Note argues that such laws do not adequately protect respondents’ due process rights. To that end, this Note proposes …

How Do You Know It Was Me? A Case Comment On Cobbler Nevada, Llc V. Gonzales, David T. Frankel

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

When Children’S Rights Are At Stake, Shall Court Remain Silent? Analysis On The Implementation Of Passivity Of Judge Principle In Child Marriage Dispensation In Indonesia, Laras Susanti Ms

Indonesia Law Review

This article explores the existence of asas hakim pasif (passivity of judge principle) in cases involving children in civil cases in Indonesia. As one of the basic principles in civil procedure, judges must be bound by the scope of the case and evidence brought by parties. The principle is not absolute, however, showing that under the Law on Judicial Power; judges are obliged to uphold justice by exploring law and social values more than often. A study case in marriage dispensation shows that judges are facing pluralism orders. Therefore, judges’ value and understanding of children’s rights is a determinant factor. …

Political Legitimacy On College Campuses, Taylor Holtman

Honors Projects

The government system is looked to have an influential impact on a person’s life and the ability to trust the legal system is extremely important to have a working democracy. Changes need to be made in order to make the minorities feel like they belong. The history of segregation and descrimigation needs to end and the government needs to enact policies to make the minorities trust again in the system. College students have felt the pressure of social media in the wrongful treatment of minorities and seeing these things happen first hand. With the rise of technology these problems will …

The Essentially-At-Home Requirement For General Jurisdiction: Some Embarrassing Cases, David Crump

Catholic University Law Review

In Daimler AG v. Baumann, the Supreme Court held that general jurisdiction does not exist unless the defendant is “essentially at home” in the forum. It offered two examples of places fitting this description but gave little further guidance or justification. A metaphor, such as essentially at home, is a bad way to express a legal standards, because the essence of a metaphor is that it substitutes one reality for another, creating a deliberate confusion. The Court also equated general jurisdiction with what it called all-purpose jurisdiction, which is wrong because it is easy to pose cases in which general …

The Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 37(E) And Achieving Uniformity Of Case Law On Sanctions For Esi Spoliation: Focusing On The “Intent To Deprive” Culpability Under Rule 37(E)(2), Jung Won Jun, Rockyoun Ihm

Catholic University Law Review

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(e) was adopted in 2015 primarily to resolve the circuit split and promote uniformity of case law on ESI (electronically stored information) spoliation sanctions. This Article examines relevant case law under the new Rule 37(e) and finds that courts have treated similar spoliation conduct differently due to the lack of a clear standard for finding the spoliator's intent to deprive another party of the use of the destroyed ESI at issue. This inconsistency has been exacerbated by the courts’ inconsistent reliance on their inherent authority to sanction based on bad faith analyses. Therefore, this Article …

Mdl In The States, Zachary D. Clopton, D. Theodore Rave

Northwestern University Law Review

Multidistrict litigation (MDL) is exploding. MDL makes up a large and increasing portion of the federal civil docket. It has been used in recent years to manage and resolve some of our largest controversies: opioids, NFL concussions, Volkswagen “clean” diesel, and many more. And, given its growing importance, MDL has come to dominate the academic literature on complex litigation.

At its base, MDL is a tool to coordinate related cases across different courts in service of justice, efficiency, and fairness. These goals are not unique to the federal courts. State courts handle far more cases than federal courts, including the …

Criminal Advisory Juries: A Sensible Compromise For Jury Sentencing Advocates, Kurt A. Holtzman

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch recently noted that “juries in our constitutional order exercise supervisory authority over the judicial function by limiting the judge’s power to punish.” Yet in the majority of jurisdictions, contemporary judge-only sentencing practices neuter juries of their supervisory authority by divorcing punishment from guilt decisions. Moreover, without a chance to voice public disapproval at sentencing, juries are muted in their ability to express tailored, moral condemnation for distinct criminal acts. Although the modern aversion to jury sentencing is neither historically nor empirically justified, jury sentencing opponents are rightly cautious of abdicating sentencing power to laypeople. Nevertheless, …

Third-Party Standing And Abortion Providers: The Hidden Dangers Of June Medical Services, Elika Nassirinia

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

Standing is a long held, judicially-created doctrine intended to establish the proper role of courts by identifying who may bring a case in federal court. While standing usually requires that a party asserts his or her own rights, the Supreme Court has created certain exceptions that allow litigants to bring suit on behalf of third parties when they suffer a concrete injury, they have a “close relation” to the third party, and there are obstacles to the third party's ability to protect his or her own interests. June Medical Services, heard by the Supreme Court on June 29, 2020, …

Civil Procedure Update 2021 (Handout And Slide Deck), Verónica C. Gonzales, Julio C. Romero

Faculty Scholarship

This presentation aims to 1) review recent amendments to the state and federal rules of civil procedure; 2) help you understand the impact of recent federal and state published opinions interpreting and applying the rules of civil procedure; and 3) assess your understanding of the updates.

The Attorney-Client Privilege And Former Employees, Douglas R. Richmond

Catholic University Law Review

Attorney-client relationships are infused with confidentiality, and the attorney-client privilege is critical to the protection of sensitive and important communications between clients and their lawyers. Organizational clients, like individuals, are entitled to assert the attorney-client privilege concerning communications that fall within its scope.

In the organizational context, a common problem is determining who among the entity’s employees speaks on its behalf, such that communications between the entity’s lawyers and those employees may be protected against discovery by the organization’s adversaries and other third parties. And, of course, as organizations experience the inevitable turnover in their workforces, another issue surfaces: when, …

Standing Up For Consumers: Whether Third Party Payors Can Establish Standing To Sue Against Drug Manufacturers Under Civil Rico, Brianna Vollman

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Seize The Day: Renewed Hope For The Permissibility Of In Rem Counterclaims Against The United States Government After The Fifth Circuit's Substituted Opinion In $4,480,466.16?, Evan Gildenblatt

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Guidelines And Best Practices For Implementing The 2015 Discovery Amendments Concerning Proportionality (Third Edition), Bolch Judicial Institute

Bolch Judicial Institute Publications

This third edition of The Guidelines and Best Practices to Achieve Proportionality was developed following a proportionality conference in June 2019, at which practitioners and judges reviewed and discussed the results of several studies evaluating the 2015 amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure. A small working group convened by the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law School, led by Judge Paul Grimm and including practitioners David Kessler and Jennie Anderson, gathered these insights, revised the guidelines, issued them for public comment, and made further revisions in light of the comments. As with any group product of this nature, where …

Unrules, Gabriel Scheffler, Cary Coglianese, Daniel E. Walters

Articles

At the center of contemporary debates over public law lies administrative agencies' discretion to impose rules. Yet for every one of these rules, there are also unrules nearby. Often overlooked and sometimes barely visible, unrules are the decisions that regulators make to lift or limit the scope of a regulatory obligation through, for instance, waivers, exemptions, or exceptions. In some cases, unrules enable regulators to reduce burdens on regulated entities or to conserve valuable government resources in ways that make law more efficient. However, too much discretion to create unrules can facilitate undue business influence over the law, weaken regulatory …

Increasing Substantive Fairness And Mitigating Social Costs In Eviction Proceedings: Instituting A Civil Right To Counsel For Indigent Tenants In Pennsylvania, Robin M. White

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The U.S. Constitution provides criminal defendants the right to a court-appointed attorney but gives no similar protection to civil litigants. Although federal law does not supply any categorical rights to counsel for civil litigants, all 50 states have instituted the right in at least one category of civil law that substantially impacts individuals’ rights. Since 2017, several U.S. cities have enacted such a right for tenants facing eviction. In so doing, these cities responded to American families’ increasing rent burden, the recent publication of nationwide eviction data, the sociological research concerning the impact of eviction, and the lack of procedural …

Using Random Assignment To Measure Court Accessibility For Low-Income Divorce Seekers, James D. Greiner, Ellen L. Degnan, Thomas Ferriss, Roseanna Sommers

Articles

We conducted a field experiment in which 311 low-income individuals seeking a divorce were randomly assigned to receive access to a pro bono lawyer (versus minimal help) to assist with filing for divorce. Examining court records, we found that assignment to an attorney made a large difference in whether participants filed for and obtained a divorce. Three years after randomization, 46% of the treated group had terminated their marriages in the proper legal venue, compared to 9% of the control group. Among “compliers”—participants who obtained representation only if assigned to receive it—those with lawyers were far more likely to file …

Dispute Settlement In The American Second Court Of Appeal And Its Scope Of Practice In The Jordanian Courts Of Appeal, Adel Salem Al-Louzi

UAEU Law Journal

This paper deals with the dispute settlement regulation applied in the American second quarter court for appeal and its scope of practice in the Jordanian courts of appeal. As we have presented in this study and specifically in the first part the formulation of American second quarter court for appeal and the formulation of the Jordanian courts of appeal whereas the dispute settlement in the American second quarter court for appeal and its scope of practice in the Jordanian courts of appeal were presented in the second part. Moreover the study has come to the conclusion that the appeal settlement …

Disrupting Frivolous Defenses, Thomas D. Russell

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

Judge Milton I. Shadur was a disrupter of frivolous defenses. In 2018, Judge Shadur died at the age of 93 after 37 years as a judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Sua sponte, Judge Shadur reviewed civil answers, and disrupted the pleading of frivolous defenses. Sua Sponte Shadur—as some lawyers called him—rejected answers that departed from or ignored Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

In 2001, Judge Shadur issued an Appendix to an order in State Farm v. Riley, 199 F.R.D. 276 (N.D. Ill. 2001) with his expectations regarding how …

The Shifting Sands Of Cost Shifting, Andrew M. Pardieck

Cleveland State Law Review

The cost-shifting analysis employed by the federal courts in ruling on discovery disputes is flawed. There is tremendous variability in how courts interpret the factors guiding the analysis. There is tremendous variability in the information courts rely on in deciding whether to preclude the discovery or shift its costs. The result is waste for the litigants, courts, and society as a whole. This Article argues that there is a better way: mandate cooperation before cost shifting. The courts should condition proportionality and cost-shifting rulings on cooperation. The cooperation should be substantive: require disclosure of objective information about the disputed discovery …

Brief Of Complex Litigation Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Myriam E. Gilles

Amicus Briefs

The amici are law professors who teach and write in the field of federal civil procedure and complex litigation. Amici share an interest in presenting this Court with an impartial view on the function of the class action and its relationship to the law of Article III justiciability to inform the question presented in this case.

Tull V. United States: The Right To A Jury Trial In A Statutory Proceeding, John A. Kolanz

Journal of Natural Resources & Environmental Law

No abstract provided.

Preserving Issues For Appeal In Nevada's Federal Courts, Micah Echols, Tom Stewart

Nevada Law Journal Forum

Attorneys in federal courts across the country, including in the District of Nevada, are aware of the age-old rule that, generally, new issues cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. The question then becomes, how are these issues properly raised, and preserved, in the district court so that they are preserved for an appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit or, ultimately, the Supreme Court of the United States? This article provides guiding principles based upon federal case law and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to answer these questions on preserving error …

The Intervention Of The Court For Assistance In Obtaining Evidence And Temporary And Precautionary Measures During The Course Of The Arbitral Proceedings: A Comparative Analysis Between The Palestinian And Jordanian Law., Khaled I. Talahma Article

UAEU Law Journal

The role of the judiciary in supporting arbitration panels is a necessity required by the nature of functions performed by arbitration systems in the community, as well as the requirements of protecting the interests of arbitration parties. Due to the importance of this role, this study examines the supporting role of courts in securing evidence and taking temporary and provisional actions; matters which are outside the scope and authority of the arbitration panels. The study conducted a comparative analysis of the Palestinian and Jordanian laws to compare legislative organization of this role, and clarify legal gaps which may face a …

The Fall Of The Right To Take Action In Accordance With The Jordanian Code Of Civil Procedure, Abdul Rahman Jumaa

UAEU Law Journal

This research has focused on procedural lapse, which is a penalty that leads to the absolute withdrawal of the procedural right from the right-holder in case of non-use of this right within the time limit specified by law. It has been shown that all time limits specified to exercising a procedural right constitute a lapse of time, whereas the time limits specified to exercising a procedural obligation or to perform an obligation ordered by a judge within his/her capacity to manage the case before him/her are considered as pleading times. The times of lapse have been clarified. In addition to …

Reluctance Or Apathy? Examining Georgia’S Continued Adherence To A Strict Mutuality Issue Preclusion Doctrine, Boris W. Gautier

Georgia State University Law Review

The common law doctrine of issue preclusion, also known as collateral estoppel, prevents parties from relitigating an issue in subsequent lawsuits if a prior judgment already conclusively decided the issue. Issue preclusion traditionally required strict mutuality of parties; the first and second lawsuits had to involve the exact same litigants. Although the majority of jurisdictions now allow nonmutual issue preclusion, Georgia continues to enforce “identity of parties” as a necessary element of issue preclusion. Despite recently reaffirming this requirement, the Georgia Supreme Court has not thoroughly analyzed the merits of the rule.

This Note examines the evolution of issue preclusion …

Georgia’S Approach To Proportionality And Sanctions For The Spoliation Of Electronically Stored Information, Matthew Daigle

Georgia State University Law Review

The rapid evolution and implementation of technology in society has resulted in the increasing use of data as evidence in court. While the scope of discovery is limited by, among other things, the burden imposed on the producing party, the sheer magnitude of electronic evidence compared to its physical counterpart necessitates a different framework for evaluating such a burden. Without limiting factors, the discoverability of electronically stored information (ESI) exposes producing parties to liability disproportionate to the value of a case. While the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have evolved to address the discovery of ESI, the Georgia Civil Practice …

Preserving Issues For Appeal In The Nevada State District Courts Under Nevada's New 2019 Rules Of Civil Procedure, Micah Echols, Tom Stewart

Nevada Law Journal Forum

Practicing attorneys are aware of the age-old rule of appellate practice that new issues cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. But, how are these issues properly raised, and preserved, in the district courts so that they are preserved for an appeal before the Nevada Court of Appeals or the Nevada Supreme Court? This article provides guiding principles based upon Nevada case law and the newly-revised 2019 Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure to answer these questions on preserving error for an appeal in Nevada’s state courts.

The Forum-Defendant Rule, The Mischief Rule, And Snap Removal, Howard M. Wasserman

William & Mary Law Review Online

Samuel Bray’s The Mischief Rule reconceptualizes and revitalizes that venerable canon of statutory interpretation. Bray’s new approach to the mischief rule offers a textual solution to an ongoing civil procedure puzzle—forum defendants and “snap removal.” The forum-defendant rule provides that a diversity case is not removable from state to federal court when a properly joined and served defendant is a citizen of the forum state. Snap removal occurs whena defendant removes before the forum defendant has been properly served, “snapping” the case into federal court. Three courts of appeals and a majority of district courts have endorsed this practice, concluding …