Civil Procedure | Open Access Articles | Digital Commons Network™

The Silent Criminal Defendant And The Presumption Of Innocence: In The Hands Of Real Jurors, Is Either Of Them Safe, Mitchell J. Frank, Dawn Broschard

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Go to article

The Right To Appeal Of A Person Sentenced For A Criminal Offense: : The Current Egyptian Ordinary Legal System And Its Degree Of Compliance With Internationally Recognized Standards, Mohamed El Ghannam

Archived Theses and Dissertations

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Summary Of Winston Products Co. V. Deboer, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 4, Dustin Howell

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This case examines “the method used to compute the time for filing motions for judgment as a matter of law and for a new trial and the tolling period to file a notice of appeal when these motions are served by mail or electronic means.”2 This case also addresses the issue of whether tolling motions also toll the time to appeal from a post-judgment order awarding attorney fees and costs.

Go to article

Sausage-Making, Pigs' Ears, And Congressional Expansion Of Federal Jurisdiction: Exxon Mobil V. Allapattah And Its Lessons For The Class Action Fairness Act, Adam N. Steinman

Washington Law Review

The year 2005 witnessed two watershed developments in federal jurisdiction: the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc. and the enactment of the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). Allapantah and CAFA raise the same fundamental question: how should courts interpret a statute whose text would expand federal jurisdiction far beyond what Congress apparently intended? In Allapattah, the Court confronted this question in resolving an aspect of the supplemental jurisdiction statute that had deeply divided both the judiciary and academia. CAFA's expansion of federal jurisdiction over class actions will require courts to struggle with this …

Go to article

Foreward: Of Offers Not (Frequently) Made And (Rarely) Accepted: The Mystery Of Federal Rule 68, Harold S. Lewis Jr., Thomas A. Eaton

Mercer Law Review

This Symposium brings together, from around the nation, eight civil rights and employment discrimination lawyers, four legal academics, and an eminent federal judge, all with deep experience and interest in the promise and pitfalls of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68. We gather to unravel a mystery. In an oversimplified nutshell, Rule 68, as construed, enables the defendants to say to the plaintiffs in employment discrimination and civil rights cases: "If you don't beat my offer at trial, you forfeit your right to any future statutory attorney fees." Rule 68 would, therefore, appear to give the defendants a significant incentive …

Go to article

Jackson V. Birmingham Board Of Education And The Expansion Of Title Ix's Judicially Implied Private Right Of Action, Darl H. Champion Jr

Mercer Law Review

In Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, the United States Supreme Court departed from its current trend of hostility toward implying rights of action in federal statutes. In Jackson the Court held that there is an implied private right of action for retaliation under Title IX when a whistleblower is retaliated against for complaining about sex discrimination. As a result, the Court increased the protections to employees and students of funding recipients who report instances of sex discrimination.

Go to article

Sausage-Making, Pigs' Ears, And Congressional Expansions Of Federal Jurisdiction: Exxon Mobil V. Allapattah And Its Lessons For The Class Action Fairness Act, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

The year 2005 witnessed two watershed developments in federal jurisdiction: the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc. and the enactment of the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). Allapattah and CAFA raise the same fundamental question: how should courts interpret a statute whose text would expand federal jurisdiction far beyond what Congress apparently intended? In Allapattah, the Court confronted this question in resolving an aspect of the supplemental jurisdiction statute that had deeply divided both the judiciary and academia. CAFA's expansion of federal jurisdiction over class actions will require courts to struggle with this question …

Go to article

Symposium On Frcp 68: Lessons From New Jersey, Albert Yoon

Mercer Law Review

I would like to begin by thanking the Mercer Law Review for the opportunity to participate in its Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 68 Symposium. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 681 ("Rule 68") is an important topic, and it is an honor to discuss the rule with such distinguished attorneys, jurists, and fellow academics. The reach of Rule 68 is certainly wide, applying to all federal civil litigation. The effect of Rule 68, however, is small: most scholars and practitioners agree it has little bearing on how cases are litigated. If Rule 68, and offer-ofjudgment rules generally, are to have …

Go to article

2005 Trademark Decisions Of The Federal Circuit, Stephen R. Baird

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Exorbitant Jurisdiction, Kevin M. Clermont, John R.B. Palmer

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Exorbitant territorial jurisdiction in civil cases comprises those classes of jurisdiction, although exercised validly under a country's rules, that nonetheless are unfair to the defendant because of a lack of significant connection between the sovereign and either the parties or the dispute. The United States, France, and most of the rest of the world exercise a good deal of exorbitant jurisdiction so defined. In the United States, an emphasis on power derived from territoriality has led to jurisdictional restraint in some respects, but has also allowed general jurisdiction based solely on transient physical presence, the attachment of property, or extensive …

Go to article

Jurisdiction To Adjudicate: A Revised Analysis, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Personal jurisdiction doctrine as articulated by the Supreme Court is in disarray. As a constitutional doctrine whose contours remain imprecise, the law of personal jurisdiction has generated confusion, unpredictability, and extensive satellite litigation over what should be an uncomplicated preliminary issue. Many commentators have long lamented these defects, making suggestions for how the doctrine could be improved. Although many of these proposals have had much to offer, they generally have failed to articulate (or adequately justify or explain) a simple and sound approach to jurisdiction that the Supreme Court can embrace. This Article revises the law of personal jurisdiction by …

Go to article

Invisible Settlements, Invisible Discrimination, Minna J. Kotkin

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Subclassing, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

This Article is the first to take a hard look at Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(4)(B), an oft-slighted part of the class action scheme that permits a court to create subclasses "when appropriate." Despite its tautologically unhelpful text, no other court or commentator has undertaken a comprehensive analysis of this provision. The time to do so is certainly now. As class actions grow bigger, plaintiffs seek new ways to meet Rule 23 "s certification requirements. Just in the last few years, plaintiffs have turned to subclassing's sister provision, Rule 23(c)(4)(A), which has consequently received a flurry of commentary from …

Go to article

Summary Of International Game Tech. V. Dist. Ct., 122 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 13, Krystal Gallagher

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Petitioner, Nevada’s Attorney General, appeals from the district courts’ refusals to dismiss actions brought under Nevada’s False Claims Act (“FCA”) by respondents, James McAndrews and Beeler, Schad & Diamond, P.C. Nevada permits individuals to become private attorneys general, which grants individuals the right to sue on behalf of the state. This individual is known as a quitam plaintiff. After filing an action, the quitam plaintiff must send the Attorney General a copy of the complaint and a written disclosure of all material information, and then the complaint is sealed. The complaint remains sealed and the defendants are not served until …

Go to article

Summary Of Mccrary V. Bianco, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 10, Eunice Kasiske

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Thomas and Rebecca McCrary (“McCrary”) appealed from a post-verdict district court order awarding attorney fees based upon the cost shifting provisions of NRCP 68 and NRS 17.115. Dominic Bianco (“Bianco”) cross-appealed from the denial of its motion for partial satisfaction of judgment. McCrary unsuccessfully argued that the district court erred in its failure to consider pre-offer attorney fees and costs as part of its determination of the total judgment for cost-shifting purposes. McCrary successfully argued that the district court erred in not including pre-offer prejudgment interest in its comparison between the total amount awarded and the offer of judgment, for …

Go to article

An Examination Of The Gacaca Tribunals In Rwanda As A Practical Means Of Delivering Mass Justice, Myra Oscar Sabongi

Archived Theses and Dissertations

[abstract not provided]

Go to article

Terminating Calder: "Effects" Based Jurisdiction In The Ninth Circuit After Schwarzenegger V. Fred Martin Motor Co., A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

None available.

Go to article

Chapter 631: Increasing The Effectiveness Of Domestic Violence Protective Orders, Kerry Campbell

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

The Preservation Obligation: Regulating And Sanctioning Pre-Litigation Spoliation In Federal Court, A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

The issue of discovery misconduct, specifically as it pertains to the pre-litigation duty to preserve and sanctions for spoliation, has garnered much attention in the wake of decisions by two prominent jurists whose voices carry great weight in this area. In Pension Committee of University of Montreal Pension Plan v. Bank of America Securities, Judge Shira Scheindlin - of the Zubulake e-discovery cases - penned a scholarly and thorough opinion setting forth her views regarding the triggering of the duty to preserve potentially relevant information pending litigation and the standards for determining the appropriate sanctions for various breaches of that …

Go to article

Celotex Trilogy Revisited: How Misapplication Of The Federal Summary Judgment Standard Is Undermining The Seventh Amendment Right To A Jury Trial, David H. Simmons, Stephen J. Jacobs, Daniel J. O'Malley, Richard H. Tami

Florida A & M University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Could Jesus Serve On A Jury - Not In The Third Circuit: Religion-Based Peremptory Challenges In United States V. Dejesus And Bronshtein V. Horn, Anthony D. Foti

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Go to article

The Hybrid Class Action As Judicial Spork: Managing Individual Rights In A Stew Of Common Wrong, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 231 (2006), Jon Romberg

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

In The Service Of Secrets: The U.S. Supreme Court Revisits Totten, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 475 (2006), Douglas Kash, Matthew Indrisano

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Second Circuit 2005 Res Judicata Developments, Jay C. Carlisle

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

During the 2005 survey year, federal courts in the Second Circuit decided a number of important res judicata matters. Several district courts applied the doctrines of claim preclusion and issue preclusion to administrative and arbitral determinations. Several courts also expanded the “actually litigated” requirement for collateral estoppel and liberally applied the doctrine of defensive claim preclusion for counterclaims. Finally, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued seven res judicata decisions. In one, Vargas v. City of New York, the Second Circuit refined the standards for applying the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. This survey article will review some of …

Go to article

Legal Indeterminacy Made In America: American Legal Methods And The Rule Of Law, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

The thesis of this Article is that the indeterminacy that plagues American law is "Made in America." It is not inherent in law. Rather, it is a product of specific choices of legal methods and of legal structures made in the American legal system.

Go to article

The Right To Counsel On Appeal: Civil Douglas, 15 Temp. Pol. & Civ. Rts. L. Rev. 603 (2006), Steven D. Schwinn

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Limited Liability Company Citizenship: Reconsidering An Illogical And Inconsistent Choice, Debra R. Cohen

Journal Articles

The trend in diversity actions in Federal Court is to rigidly apply the formalistic rules for determining citizenship (aggregate or entity) to deem limited liability companies (LLCs) to have aggregate or "partnership" citizenship. While the approach is designed to reduce the federal docket; there is no evidence that it works. More importantly, this result-oriented approach is not based on well-reasoned analysis. This approach creates several illogical and inconsistent results. It bears no reflection on modern business realities, it undermines well established principles of law, and it undercuts the purpose for which diversity jurisdiction was established, This article suggests that, just …

Go to article

Summary Of Koller V. State, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 20, Amy S. Scarborough

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a writ of prohibition granted by the Third Judicial District Court, State of Nevada.

Go to article

Reconsidering The Scope And Consequences Of Appellate Review In The Certification Decision Of Dukes V. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. , Nicole Hitch

Cleveland State Law Review

This article will explore the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and their application in the granting or denial of certification in an employment discrimination class action. In doing so, this article will examine how the district court applied these rules in the Wal-Mart action, which resulted in the certification of the largest private class action suit in American history. Additionally, this article will consider the consequences of the Ninth Circuit's utilization of permissive and liberal standards and, alternatively, the consequences of incorporation of stricter standards from various other circuit courts and the possible result of denial of certification.

Go to article

The Irrepressible Myth Of Celotex: Reconsidering Summary Judgment Burdens Twenty Years After The Trilogy, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

Twenty years ago, the Supreme Court decided a trilogy of cases on summary judgment. These cases have had a profound impact on federal litigation. Empirical data presented in this article demonstrate that federal courts have cited these three cases more than any Supreme Court decisions in history. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett is widely recognized as the most significant decision of the trilogy, both because it expanded the availability of summary judgment and because it remains the Court's most current instructions on how burdens are allocated between the party seeking and the party opposing summary judgment. However, Celotex failed to clarify …

Go to article

Full-Text Articles in Civil Procedure

The Silent Criminal Defendant And The Presumption Of Innocence: In The Hands Of Real Jurors, Is Either Of Them Safe, Mitchell J. Frank, Dawn Broschard

Faculty Scholarship

The Right To Appeal Of A Person Sentenced For A Criminal Offense: : The Current Egyptian Ordinary Legal System And Its Degree Of Compliance With Internationally Recognized Standards, Mohamed El Ghannam

Archived Theses and Dissertations

Summary Of Winston Products Co. V. Deboer, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 4, Dustin Howell

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Sausage-Making, Pigs' Ears, And Congressional Expansion Of Federal Jurisdiction: Exxon Mobil V. Allapattah And Its Lessons For The Class Action Fairness Act, Adam N. Steinman

Washington Law Review

Foreward: Of Offers Not (Frequently) Made And (Rarely) Accepted: The Mystery Of Federal Rule 68, Harold S. Lewis Jr., Thomas A. Eaton

Mercer Law Review

Jackson V. Birmingham Board Of Education And The Expansion Of Title Ix's Judicially Implied Private Right Of Action, Darl H. Champion Jr

Mercer Law Review

Sausage-Making, Pigs' Ears, And Congressional Expansions Of Federal Jurisdiction: Exxon Mobil V. Allapattah And Its Lessons For The Class Action Fairness Act, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

Symposium On Frcp 68: Lessons From New Jersey, Albert Yoon

Mercer Law Review

2005 Trademark Decisions Of The Federal Circuit, Stephen R. Baird

American University Law Review

Exorbitant Jurisdiction, Kevin M. Clermont, John R.B. Palmer

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Jurisdiction To Adjudicate: A Revised Analysis, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Invisible Settlements, Invisible Discrimination, Minna J. Kotkin

Faculty Scholarship

Subclassing, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

Summary Of International Game Tech. V. Dist. Ct., 122 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 13, Krystal Gallagher

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Summary Of Mccrary V. Bianco, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 10, Eunice Kasiske

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An Examination Of The Gacaca Tribunals In Rwanda As A Practical Means Of Delivering Mass Justice, Myra Oscar Sabongi

Archived Theses and Dissertations

Terminating Calder: "Effects" Based Jurisdiction In The Ninth Circuit After Schwarzenegger V. Fred Martin Motor Co., A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

Chapter 631: Increasing The Effectiveness Of Domestic Violence Protective Orders, Kerry Campbell

McGeorge Law Review

The Preservation Obligation: Regulating And Sanctioning Pre-Litigation Spoliation In Federal Court, A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

Celotex Trilogy Revisited: How Misapplication Of The Federal Summary Judgment Standard Is Undermining The Seventh Amendment Right To A Jury Trial, David H. Simmons, Stephen J. Jacobs, Daniel J. O'Malley, Richard H. Tami

Florida A & M University Law Review

Could Jesus Serve On A Jury - Not In The Third Circuit: Religion-Based Peremptory Challenges In United States V. Dejesus And Bronshtein V. Horn, Anthony D. Foti

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

The Hybrid Class Action As Judicial Spork: Managing Individual Rights In A Stew Of Common Wrong, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 231 (2006), Jon Romberg

UIC Law Review

In The Service Of Secrets: The U.S. Supreme Court Revisits Totten, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 475 (2006), Douglas Kash, Matthew Indrisano

UIC Law Review

Second Circuit 2005 Res Judicata Developments, Jay C. Carlisle

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Legal Indeterminacy Made In America: American Legal Methods And The Rule Of Law, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

The Right To Counsel On Appeal: Civil Douglas, 15 Temp. Pol. & Civ. Rts. L. Rev. 603 (2006), Steven D. Schwinn

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

Limited Liability Company Citizenship: Reconsidering An Illogical And Inconsistent Choice, Debra R. Cohen

Journal Articles

Summary Of Koller V. State, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 20, Amy S. Scarborough

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Reconsidering The Scope And Consequences Of Appellate Review In The Certification Decision Of Dukes V. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. , Nicole Hitch

Cleveland State Law Review

The Irrepressible Myth Of Celotex: Reconsidering Summary Judgment Burdens Twenty Years After The Trilogy, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship