Civil Procedure Commons^™

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.

Nonjurisdictionality Or Inequity, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

This short piece, written for the Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy, responds to Professor Scott Dodson's comment on Bowles v. Russell, titled Jurisdictionality and Bowles v. Russell. Dodson proposes to navigate a path between Justice Thomas's majority opinion and Justice Souter's dissent by embracing Thomas's use of mandatory and Souter's argument for deeming appellate deadlines nonjurisdictional. Considering the systemic, equitable policies underlying Rule 4(a)(6) and the prototypical examples distinguishing jurisdictional rules (those delineating classes of cases) from nonjurisdictional claim-processing rules, this nonjurisdictional alternative makes sense. It is the mandatory aspect of Professor Dodson's proposal that concerns me; it leaves no …

Reforming Federal Personal Injury Litigation By Incorporation Of The Procedural Innovations Of Scotland And Ireland: An Analysis And Proposal, Daniel H. Erskine

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

Federal procedure has embraced the referral of civil cases outside the court system to alternative dispute resolution. This article argues that by utilizing courts to settle cases through civil procedure, courts realize their central role in ensuring the quality of settlements produced through the judicial administration of justice. The purpose of this article is to provide litigants with an optional procedure to expeditiously resolve federal personal injury cases. The system proposed in this article incorporates Scottish and Irish civil procedural reforms into a coherent method for judicial officers to declare the settlement value of a personal injury action without referring …

Geographic Variation In Informed Consent Law: Two Standards For Disclosure Of Treatment Risks, David M. Studdert, Michelle M. Mello, Marin K. Levy, Russell L. Gruen, Edward J. Dunn, E. John Orav, Troyen A. Brennan

Faculty Scholarship

We analyzed 714 jury verdicts in informed consent cases tried in 25 states in 1985–2002 to determine whether the applicable standard of care (“patient” vs. “professional” standard) affected the outcome. Verdicts for plaintiffs were significantly more frequent in states with a patient standard than in states with a professional standard (27 percent vs. 17 percent, P = 0.02). This difference in outcomes did not hold for other types of medical malpractice litigation (36 percent vs. 37 percent, P = 0.8). The multivariate odds of a plaintiff’s verdict were more than twice as high in states with a patient standard than …

Civil Procedure To Enforce Transnational Rights?, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Relationship Between Defense Counsel, Policyholders, And Insurers: Nevada Rides Yellow Cab Toward "Two-Client" Model Of Tripartite Relationship. Are Cumis Counsel And Malpractice Claims By Insurers Next?, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

It happens constantly in civil litigation. An insurance company hires a lawyer to defend its policyholder from a third party’s claim of injury. But just who is the lawyer’s “client?” Is it the policyholder who is the named defendant in the case and is “represented” in court proceedings? Or is it the insurer who, in most cases, selected the attorney, pays the attorney, supervises the litigation, and has (by the terms of the liability insurance policy) the right to settle the case, even over the objections of the policyholder? Ordinarily, the liability insurer has both the duty to defend a …

Summary Of Washoe Med. Ctr. V. Dist. Ct., 122 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 110, Aubree Nielsen

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An appeal involving an issue of first impression – whether a plaintiff in a medical malpractice action may amend her complaint, under NRCP 15(a), to comply with NRS 41A.071, which requires that complaints for medical malpractice be accompanied by a medical expert affidavit.

Teaching Comparative Civil Procedure, Antonio Gidi

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Integrating Transnational Perspectives Into Civil Procedure: What Not To Teach, Kevin M. Clermont

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Integrating Transnational Legal Perspectives Into The First Year Civil Procedure Curriculum, Helen Hershkoff

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Transnational Perspectives Regarding The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Edward F. Sherman

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Millen V. Dist. Ct., Nev. Adv. Op. No. 105, Sherry Moore

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The district court judge disqualified petitioner’s counsel because petitioner’s counsel was on the judge’s recusal list. Petitioner filed a writ of mandamus to prevent the district court judge’s disqualification of her attorney from representing her at trial.

Summary Of Rocker V. Kpmg Llp, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 101, 148 P.3d 703, Matt Lay

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from an order of the Eighth Judicial District Court, State of Nevada, granting motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and failure to plead with particularity.

Constructing Class Action Reality, Debra Lyn Bassett

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Brent G. Theobald Constr. V. Richardson Constr., 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 98, Michelle L'Hommedieu

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

No abstract provided.

Medical Malpractice Law, Kathleen M. Mccauley, Dana A. Dews

University of Richmond Law Review

With President George W. Bush's promise to continue working toward tort reform, medical malpractice issues are once again garnering media and voter attention. This article examines recent judicial decisions and statutory amendments affecting patients and health care providers in the commonwealth in the context of medical malpractice law.

Appellate Review Of Discovery Orders In Federal Court: A Suggested Approach For Handling Privilege Claims, Cassandra Burke Robertson

Washington Law Review

The federal circuit courts of appeals have generally recognized that a party suffers real hardship when the district court erroneously orders it to disclose privileged information. Review of the disclosure order after final judgment is usually an insufficient remedy; once the information has been disclosed, it can never again be fully confidential. Consequently, the courts have struggled to provide a mechanism by which such orders can be immediately appealed. However, privilege orders presenting novel questions of law or issues of first impression do not clearly fit within the doctrinal requirements of the most common methods of interlocutory review. Appellate courts …

Reverse-Erie, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Traditional Erie is like a false front on a movie set, with nobody seeing the unfinished rear side. That other side depicts the extent of federal law applicable in state courts, which is determined under a doctrine called reverse-Erie. While everyone has an Erie theory and stands ready to debate it, almost no one has a theory of reverse-Erie, and no one at all has developed a clear choice-of-law methodology for it. Reverse-Erie, often misunderstood, mischaracterized, and misapplied by judges and commentators, goes strangely ignored by most scholars. And it goes ignored even though it holds a key to understanding …

The Merger Of Common-Law And Equity Pleading In Virginia, W. Hamilton Bryson

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reassessing Charitable Immunity In Virginia, Carl Tobias

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Juror Questions During Trial: A Window Into Juror Thinking, Shari Seidman Diamond, Mary R. Rose, Beth Murphy, Sven Smith

Vanderbilt Law Review

The jury has undergone a dramatic transformation from its earliest incarnation when jurors acted as witnesses, investigators, and tribunal. In the modern American jury trial, the parties determine what jurors learn during the proceedings. Jurors of today, assigned the role of audience members until deliberations begin, typically speak in the courtroom only during jury selection and through their verdict at the end of the trial. In light of their enforced silence throughout the trial, jurors have no opportunity to clarify or check on their interpretation of the evidence and they provide few external indications about their thinking as the trial …

Appealing Remand Orders Under The Class Action Fairness Act, David L. Horan

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Civil Due Process, Criminal Due Process, Niki Kuckes

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Just Say "No Fishing": The Lure Of Metaphor, Elizabeth G. Thornburg

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The phrase "fishing expedition" is widely used in popular culture and in the law. In the legal setting, reliance on the metaphor can act as a substitute for rigorous analysis, disguising the factors that influence the result in a case. At best, it is uninformative. Worse, the fishing metaphor may itself shape the court's attitude toward the issue or claim in a lawsuit.

This Article begins by tracing the development of the "fishing expedition" metaphor in civil cases, demonstrating how its changing uses reflect and contribute to the legal controversies of each era. The policies that originally supported limited use …

Is There A Compelling Interest To Compel ? Examining Pre-Hearing Subpoenas Under The Federal Arbitration Act, Dean W. Sattler

Pace Law Review

No abstract provided.

8th Annual Open Government Summit: Access To Public Records Act & Open Meetings Act, 2006, Department Of Attorney General, State Of Rhode Island

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Only One Kick At The Cat: A Contextual Rubric For Evaluating Res Judicata And Collateral Estoppel In International Commercial Arbitration, Randy D. Gordon

Faculty Scholarship

Arbitration is the preferred method of resolving disputes arising out of international commercial transactions. It stands outside national legal systems because contracting parties agree in advance that they want neutral arbitrators — not local judges and juries — deciding who is at fault when a commercial relationship breaks down. But arbitration nevertheless butts up against litigation from time to time, often because one party attempts to arbitrate a matter that has been litigated to conclusion or vice versa. This article examines — through a contextual approach — questions of preclusion that thereby arise and ultimately suggests that res judicata and …

No Relief: Understanding The Supreme Court's Decision In Town Of Castle Rock V. Gonzales Through The Rights/Remedies Framework, Tritia L. Yuen

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Trial Practice And Procedure, John O'Shea Sullivan, Ashby L. Kent

Mercer Law Review

The 2005 survey period yielded several noteworthy decisions relating to federal trial practice and procedure, many of which concerned issues of first impression in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. This Article analyzes several recent developments in the Eleventh Circuit, including significant rulings in the areas of arbitration, civil procedure, statutory interpretation, personal jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction, and other issues of interest to the trial practitioner.