Civil Procedure Commons^™

The Place Of Court-Connected Mediation In A Democratic Justice System, Nancy A. Welsh

Faculty Scholarship

A justice system, and the processes located within it, ought to deliver justice. That seems simple enough. But, of course, delivering justice is never so simple. Justice and the systems that serve it are the creatures of context.

This Article considers mediation as just one innovation within the much larger evolution of the judicial system of the United States. First, this Article outlines how the values of democratic governance undergird our traditional picture of the American justice system, presumably because the invocation of such values helps the system to deliver something that will be respected by the nation’s citizens as …

Discovery Abuse In The State Of Georgia – Just How Bad Is It?, C. Ronald Ellington

Popular Media

How frequently do Georgia lawyers encounter discovery abuse in civil litigation? What are the most prevalent kinds of discovery abuse? Do attorneys who usually represent plaintiffs perceive discovery abuse occurring more often or at about the same rate as attorneys from the defense bar? Is discovery abuse worse in metro-Atlanta than small town Georgia?

Adrift On A Sea Of Uncertainty: Preserving Uniformity In Patent Law Post-Vornado Through Deference To The Federal Circuit, Larry D. Thompson

Scholarly Works

Congress created the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 1982, and granted that court exclusive appellate jurisdiction over civil actions arising under patent law. Congress's primary goals in creating the Federal Circuit were to produce a more uniform patent jurisprudence and to reduce forum shopping based on favorable patent law. But in the 2002 decision of Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Systems, the Supreme Court held that patent counterclaims alone could not create Federal Circuit jurisdiction. This decision not only overruled the Federal Circuit's longstanding jurisdictional rule, but also opened the door for Regional …

Induced Litigation, Tracey E. George, Chris Guthrie

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

If "justice delayed" is "justice denied,"justice is often denied in American courts. Delay in the courts is a "ceaseless and unremitting problem of modem civil justice" that "has an irreparable effect on both plaintiffs and defendants." To combat this seemingly intractable problem, judges and court administrators routinely clamor for additional judicial resources to enable them to manage their dockets more "effectively and efficiently." By building new courthouses and adding new judgeships, a court should be able to manage its caseload more efficiently. Trial judges should be able to hold motion hearings, host settlement conferences, and conduct trials in a timely …

A Proposed Solution To Jury Confusion In Patent Infringement Cases Involving Means-Plus-Function Claims, Tony Caliendo

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Attorney General V. Nos, 120 Nev. Adv. Op. 11, Christopher W. Carson

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

No abstract provided.

"Defendant Veto" Or "Totality Of The Circumstances?": It's Time For The Supreme Court To Straighten Out The Personal Jurisdiction Standard Once Again, Robert J. Condlin

Faculty Scholarship

Commentators frequently claim that there is no single, coherent doctrine of extra-territorial personal jurisdiction, and, unfortunately, they are correct. The International Shoe case, commonly (but inaccurately) thought of as the wellspring of the modern form of the doctrine, announced a relatively straightforward, two-factor, four-permutation test that worked well for resolving most cases. In the nearly sixty-year period following Shoe, however, as the Supreme Court expanded and refined the standard, what was once straightforward and uncomplicated became serendipitous and convoluted. Two general, and generally incompatible, versions of the doctrine competed for dominance. The first, what might best be described as …

Federal Common Law In An Age Of Treaties, Michael P. Van Alstine

Faculty Scholarship

In this article Professor Van Alstine explores the interaction between the limitations on the doctrine of federal common law and the power of federal courts to interpret the law within the scope of treaties. The article first reviews the constitutional foundation for the operation of treaties as directly applicable ("self-executing") federal law. It then explains that, notwithstanding the Erie doctrine, federal courts may obtain lawmaking powers from either a delegation by Congress or in certain areas of "uniquely federal interest."

Professor Van Alstine then argues that the judicial relationship with self-executing treaty law in principle proceeds from the same source …

Case Note: Civil Procedure—The Forest For The Trees: The Minnesota Supreme Court Considers The Collateral Estoppel Effect Of Criminal Convictions In Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. V. Reed, Charles Delbridge

William Mitchell Law Review

This Note first examines the goals and history of the doctrine of collateral estoppel, including the great changes the doctrine has undergone of late. It then examines the facts of the Reed case, details the procedural history of the case, and outlines the analysis of the courts in deciding the case. This Note then analyzes both the successes and the failures of the Minnesota Supreme Court in the Reed opinion. Finally, this Note concludes that the Reed decision is correct in its privity and due process analyses, but falls short by failing to clarify what collateral estoppel effect a criminal …

Establishing The Truth On Facts: Has The Chinese Civil Process Achieved This Goal?, Zhong Jianhua, Yu Guanghua

Florida State University Journal of Transnational Law & Policy

No abstract provided.

Avoidable Due Process Confusion: Special Use Hearings In Illinois After Klaeren, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 609 (2004), James C. Munson, Christi J. Guerrini

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Jones On Evidence: Civil And Criminal 7th Ed., Anne T. Mckenna, Clifford S. Fishman

Books

In 2004, Anne began co-authoring this seminal evidence treatise, which is in its second century of publication. Jones on Evidence (“Jones”) currently contains 5 hardbound volumes and a softbound appendix of new chapters with two new hardbound volumes forthcoming. All volumes are updated yearly. Jones enables civil and criminal practitioners in private and public practice to learn and understand evidentiary issues and evidentiary rules, including the Federal Rules of Evidence, and to use evidence effectively, whether the issue is admission, exclusion, preservation or relevance. Jones has been cited in numerous federal and state court opinions and law review …

The Paradox Of The Misuse Of Administrative Law In Erisa Benefit Claims, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 727 (2004), Mark D. Debofsky

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Boundary Of Personal Jurisdiction: The "Effects Test" And The Protection Of Crazy Horse's Name, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 381 (2004), Scott Fruehwald

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

State Sovereign Immunity And The Plaintiff State: Does The Eleventh Amendment Bar Removal Of Actions Filed In State Court?, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 513 (2004), Virginia F. Milstead

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Flores V. Southern Peru Copper Corporation: The Second Circuit Fails To Set A Threshold For Corporate Alien Tort Claims Act Liability, Lori Delaney

Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business

The Second and Ninth Circuit Courts have recently heard cases dealing with the application of the Alien Tort Claim Act (ATCA) against private, U.S. based multinational corporations (MNCs), and come to differing conclusions on the standards that should be used in applying this complicated law to suits by foreign nationals against U.S. based MNCs. The issue of private corporate liability under the ATCA was not definitively resolved by the Supreme Court in its recent decision in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain , and thus the Circuits must continue to grapple with the application of the ATCA to U.S. based MNCs.

The Second …

Offensive Issue Preclusion In The Criminal Context: Two Steps Foward, One Step Back, Michelle S. Simon

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This article addresses whether the expansion of the doctrine of issue preclusion in the federal criminal area should mirror the expansion of the doctrine in the federal civil area. The article examines the general requirements of issue preclusion and the evolution of issue preclusion in both the civil and criminal context. Next, this article examines the current status of offensive and defensive issue preclusion when the first suit is civil and the second suit is criminal, the first suit is criminal and the second suit is civil, and where both the first and second action is criminal. The article then …

Will Employment Discrimination Class Actions Survive?, Melissa Hart

Publications

Recent years have witnessed increasing attacks on the appropriateness of certification of employment discrimination class action claims. The shift is often attributed to amendments to federal antidiscrimination laws in the Civil Rights Act of 1991. This paper argues, however, that the changes wrought by the 1991 amendments need not pose a barrier to resolution of employment discrimination claims through class litigation. The addition of compensatory and punitive damages and a jury-trial right may increase the level of scrutiny and perhaps the level of judicial involvement necessary in an employment discrimination class action. But they do not render such a class …

Zubulake V. Ubs Warburg: Evidence That The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure Provide The Means For Determining Cost Allocation In Electronic Discovery Disputes, Bahar Shariati

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

A Jurisdictional Nightmare: Determining When An Interdependent Copyright And Contract Claim Arises Under The Copyright Act In Scholastic Entertainment, Inc. V. Fox Entertainment Group, Inc., Christopher D. Birrer

Jeffrey S. Moorad Sports Law Journal (1994 - )

No abstract provided.

La Revision Del Codigo Civil Y La Responsabilidad Civil Extracontractual: Contradiccion En Los Terminos, 73 Rev. Jur. U.P.R. 981 (2004), Alberto Bernabe

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Duty To Preserve Documents Before Litigation Commences, Camille Cameron

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

This paper explores the nature, extent and boundaries of the duties that exist to preserve relevant documents where no litigation has yet commenced and where such litigation can be reasonably anticipated. It uses as the context for this discussion the recent tobacco litigation case McCabe v. British Australian Tobacco (BA T). The duties to preserve are considered from the perspectives of prospective plaintiffs, who need the documents to prove a claim; prospective defendants (and their servants, agents and employees), who may for legitimate reasons have document management policies that call for routine destruction of documents; and judges (and juries), who …

Restyling The Civil Rules: Clarity Without Change, Edward H. Cooper

Articles

Devoted fans and casual users of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will feel mixed emotions on contemplating the Style Project that aims to rewrite every rule from Rule 1 to the end. Well they might. The Style Project's purpose is simply stated. The Civil Rules, created in an inspired fit of creativity, have been amended repeatedly over the years. Experience has shown that even inspired initial drafting could not avoid all misadventures and that amendments drafted by successive generations wielding different drafting tools do not always fit well. The present rules can be reworked to say more clearly what …

The Cauldron Boils: Supplemental Jurisdiction, Amount In Controversy, And Diversity Of Citizenship Class Actions, Richard D. Freer

Faculty Articles

Ultimately, it does not matter how or even whether the Supreme Court resolves the issue. The fact that we still do not know whether Zahn lives ­after thirteen years-demonstrates that legislation concerning the jurisdiction of the federal courts should not be the hurried product of a few drafters whose work is not circulated for broader discussion. Ours is a world in which any change to a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure-no matter how minor-must be circulated and subjected to public comment and review. Yet the jurisdiction of the federal courts can be changed in relative secrecy and haste. Congress committed …

The Story Of Shaffer: Allocating Jurisdictional Authority Among The States, Wendy Collins Perdue

Law Faculty Publications

Shaffer v. Heitner is one of a long series of Supreme Court cases addressing the scope of state-court territorial authority. Indeed, Shaffer is the first of a dozen modern cases that delineated the Court's current conception of the constitutional limits on state-court jurisdictional authority.

Determining whether a court has jurisdiction to hear a dispute is an important preliminary step in any litigation. But the constitutional doctrine the Court has developed in this area is also an interesting window on the Court's more general understanding of the allocation of power among the states.

Gaining/Losing Perspective On The Law, Or Keeping Digital Evidence In Perspective, Christopher J. Buccafusco

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Aliens, The Internet, And "Purposeful Availment": A Reassessment Of Fifth Amendment Limits On Personal Jurisdiction, Wendy Collins Perdue

Law Faculty Publications

The international community has been struggling with questions of who should regulate the Internet and how, but little consensus has emerged. For the United States, consideration of the pros and cons of the alternative jurisdictional approaches to e-commerce and cyberspace is complicated by an overlay of constitutional law. While the rest of the world considers the policy implications of a country of origin versus a country of destination approach, the United States is wrestling with what constitutes "purposeful availment" under the Due Process Clause.

The Supreme Court has never squarely considered what limits the Fifth Amendment imposes on assertions of …

Rule 11 And Rule Revision, Carl W. Tobias, Margaret L. Sanner

Law Faculty Publications

Numerous observers of modem civil practice, whose views range across a comparatively broad spectrum, consider the 1983 amendment to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 the most controversial revision since the United States Supreme Court promulgated the original Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in 1938.1 Counsel and litigants overused and abused the 1983 modification to Rule 11 by inappropriately stressing the compensatory goal of the proviso and improperly deemphasizing the stricture's deterrence objective. Many judges vigorously enforced Rule 11, often finding violations and imposing burdensome sanctions which frequently included large attorney's fees. This activity of lawyers and parties, as well …

Lawrence V. Texas: When "Profound And Deep Convictions" Collide With Liberty Interests, Nancy J. Knauer

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article examines the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which overturned Bowers v. Hardwick and invalidated a Texas sodomy law criminalizing same-sex intimacy. The author argues that Lawrence not only advanced individual liberty interests but also marked a significant shift in the legal and cultural recognition of homosexuality, moving beyond earlier frameworks that criminalized or marginalized gay individuals. The decision reflects broader societal changes in understanding same-sex relationships and challenges the use of moral disapproval as a basis for legal restrictions on consensual adult conduct.

Prosecutorial Missed-Conduct, Patti Sudendorf

Public Interest Law Reporter

No abstract provided.