Civil Procedure Commons^™

Our Juries, Our Selves: The Power, Perception, And Politics Of The Civil Jury, Laura Dooley

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Rodney King And The Decriminalization Of Police Brutality In America: Direct And Judicial Access To The Grand Jury As Remedies For Victims Of Police Brutality When The Prosecutor Declines To Prosecute, Peter L. Davis

Scholarly Works

This Article begins with the premise that, despite political rhetoric and occasional prosecutions to the contrary, police brutality has been effectively decriminalized in this country. The Article adopts the Rodney King case as the paradigm for examining this phenomenon. Scrutinizing the culture and semantics of police brutality, the author concludes that a double standard of criminality exists in the United States, under which different rules apply to a police than to everyone else. This double standard is socially dysfunctional. Particularly among minorities, it leads to a sense of cynicism about our legal system that can result in civil disorder when …

Kentucky's Strict Summary Judgment Standard In Light Of The Supreme Court's Ruling In Steelvest, Inc. V. Scansteel Service Center, Heather C. Wright

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Repealing The Law Of Unintended Consequences? Comment On Walker (2), Thomas D. Rowe Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

Commentary on, Laurens Walker, Avoiding Surprise From Federal Civil Rule Making: The Role of Economic Analysis, 23 Journal of Legal Studies 569 (1994).

Pretrial Case Management Under The Amended Rules: Too Many Words For A Good Idea, Michael E. Tigar

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The 1993 Revision Of Federal Rule 11, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The 1983 revision of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("Rule 11" or the "Rule") proved to be the most controversial amendment in the long history of the Federal Rules. Many federal judges inconsistently interpreted the provision's language and inconsistently applied the Rule. The 1983 version fostered much costly, unwarranted satellite litigation over its phrasing and the magnitude of sanctions that courts imposed while increasing incivility among lawyers. Rule 11 motions were filed and granted against civil rights plaintiffs more frequently than any other class of litigant, and numerous judges vigorously enforced the provision against the plaintiffs, …

The Transmittal Letter Translated, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The letter in which Chief Justice Rehnquist transmitted to Congress amendments to various Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which became effective on December 1, 1993 is reproduced. Professor Tobias then offers his "translation" of the letter with his interpretation of what likely took place during the rule revision process involving the Advisory Committee on the Civil Rules, emphasizing the controversial revision of F.R.C.P. Rule 11.

Elevated Pleading In Environmental Litigation, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The recent United States Supreme Court opinion in Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit is critical to parties and attorneys who participate in environmental litigation. Leatherman proscribed the imposition of pleading requirements that are stricter than those ordinarily applied under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). Such heightened pleading requirements compel plaintiffs to plead more facts, and courts can dismiss claims that fall short of the mark.

The Leatherman court considered civil rights actions alleging that municipalities are liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.2 Although Leatherman might seem of limited relevance to environmental lawsuits, its holding and …

Experts, Stories, And Information, Richard O. Lempert

Articles

In the infancy of the jury trial, there were no witnesses. The jury was self-informing. Members of the jury were drawn from the community. It was expected that they would know, either firsthand or on the basis of what they had heard, the true facts of any disputed incident, and they were gathered together to say what those facts were. Ronald Allen and Joseph Miller, in their insightful paper, see the ideal of the self-informing jury as very much alive today. Allen and Miller tell us that jurors ideally should experience firsthand the factual information needed to arrive at rational …

Due Process In Civil Forfeiture Cases In Washington After Tellevik V. Real Property, Zhihong Pan

Washington Law Review

In Tellevik v. Real Property, the Washington Supreme Court held that the government's seizure of real property through an ex parte proceeding complied with the due process requirements of the federal Constitution. This Note examines the Tellevik decision in light of United States Supreme Court case law on procedural due process and lower federal court rulings in real property forfeiture cases. It argues that the Tellevik court, in reaching its decision, misapplied federal case law and concludes that due process requires an opportunity for a full hearing before the government can deprive an owner of real property.

The Protected Staus Of Opinion Work Product: A Misconduct Exception, Andrea L. Borgford

Washington Law Review

Opinion work product generally has remained immune from discovery, although two increasingly problematic exceptions have developed to counter this immunity. The vague "at-issue" exception permits discovery of documented mental impressions when those mental impressions are central to the subject matter of the suit. The overly narrow "crime-fraud" exception opens opinion work product to discovery when it has been developed in furtherance of a crime or fraud. Because these redundant yet inadequate exceptions share common elements and goals, courts should streamline this important area of discovery law by condensing them into a new misconduct exception.

Jurors' Views Of Civil Lawyers: Implications For Courtroom Communication, Valerie P. Hans, Krista Sweigart

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In courtroom communication, lawyers play a key role. During presentations of opening statements and closing arguments, and through examination and cross-examination of witnesses, lawyers communicate the merits of the case that the jury is to decide. Yet there is surprisingly little systematic information about how jurors perceive lawyers' communication activities. This Article presents new information based upon an interview study with civil jurors about how jurors view and evaluate attorneys and their courtroom behavior. The results of this study are used to make recommendations about enhancing the effectiveness of lawyers' communications.

A New Antidote For An Opponent's Pretrial Discovery Misconduct: Treating The Misconduct At Trial As An Admission By Conduct Of The Weakness Of The Opponent's Case, Edward J. Imwinkelried

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fines Under New Federal Civil Rule 11: The New Monetary Sanctions For The "Stop-And-Think-Again" Rule, Jeffrey A. Parness

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Central Pathology Service Medical Clinic, Inc. V. Superior Court: Statute Limiting Punitive Damages For The Professional Negligence Of Health Care Providers Includes Intentional Torts, Russell A. Gold

San Diego Law Review

In the 1992 decision of Central Pathology Service Medical Clinic, Inc. v. Superior Court the California Supreme Court held that every plaintiff injured by a health care provider must comply with section 452.13 of the California Civil Procedure Code, provided the injuries are directly related to the provision of professional services. Section 452.13 requires a pretrial determination of whether a punitive damage claim has a substantial probability of prevailing. This statute also applies to intentional torts, in which the plaintiff is injured by treatment to which the plaintiff did not consent. This Casenote analyzes whether additional procedural obstacles are warranted …

Reverse Removal, Joan E. Steinman

All Faculty Scholarship

Over the past several years, the legal community has given a great deal of thought to the problems created by multiparty, multiclaim, multiforum litigation. A flurry of activity and an outpouring of writing have resulted, including proposals for substantial changes in both substantive and procedural law. Congress legislated a number of the recommendations made by the Federal Courts Study Committee when it passed the Judicial Improvements Act of 1990. Additional legislation concerning the handling of complex cases is pending, and further action by Congress over the next several years is probable, in view of the burden that complex litigation imposes …

Private Justice And The Federal Bench, Lauren K. Robel

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Erasing The Law: The Implications Of Settlements Conditioned Upon Vacatur Or Reversal Of Judgments, Michael W. Loudenslager

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Specific Personal Jurisdiction And The "Arise From Or Relate To" Requirement ... What Does It Mean?, Mark M. Maloney

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Waiver: A Comprehensive Analysis Of A Consequence Of Inadvertently Producing Documents Protected By The Attorney-Client Privilege, Roberta M. Harding

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The inadvertent production of documents protected by the attorney-client privilege frequently occurs in contemporary litigation. This phenomena becomes more prevalent as the number of cases involving inadvertent document production grows. Unfortunately, given the present modes for resolving the waiver issue that stems from this occurrence, this occurrence could threaten to become the rule rather than the exception. The increased frequency of inadvertent document production is due primarily to more disputes arising out of production of documents demands by the opposing party that emerge as parties request the production of an increasing number of responsive documents. As a result, the sheer …

Luddington V. Indiana Bell Telephone: The 1991 Civil Rights Act Is No Help In Pending Cases, William Wright Banks Jr.

Mercer Law Review

In Luddington v. Indiana Bell Telephone, the Seventh Circuit held that the Civil Rights Act of 1991 ("the Act") does not apply to suits pending on the effective date of the Act. In so holding, the court faced conflicts between Supreme Court precedent on the issue of when statutes become effective.

The Supreme Court cases deciding whether statutes are to be applied retroactively have been said to be "'in irreconcilable contradiction.' " In Bradley v. School Board of City of Richmond, the Supreme Court stated that statutes are presumed to apply to cases pending when the statute becomes …

Tightening Judicial Standards For Granting Foreign Discovery Requests, Ryan J. Earl

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Toward A Liberal Application Of The "Close Of All The Evidence" Requirement Of Rule 50(B) Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure: Embracing Fairness Over Formalism, Rollin A. Ransom

Michigan Law Review

This Note examines the language and purposes of rule 50 to determine if and when a relaxed application of its requirements is appropriate. Part I considers the terms and goal of the rule and concludes that its purpose is to put the party opposing the motion for judgment as a matter of law on notice of the movant's assertion that the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law, and to provide the opposing party an opportunity to "cure." Part II discusses courts' varying application of the requirement that a motion for judgment as a matter of law made at …

Explaining One-Way Fee Shifting, Harold J. Krent

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Fee Shifting Under The Equal Access To Justice Act -- A Qualified Success, Harold J. Krent

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Of Citizen Suits And Citizen Sunstein (With E. Shenkman), Harold J. Krent

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Rule 11 Gets Moderate Exercise In Montana: Part Ii, Cynthia Ford

Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings

This article provides the results of an informal survey of active practicing lawyers in Montana that the author conducted to gather additional information about the actual operation of Rule 11 in Montana and to sample the perceptions of the bar about the use of Rule 11 and its effect on the practice of law in Montana.

Supplemental Jurisdiction In § 1441 Removed Cases: An Unsurveyed Frontier Of Congress’ Handiwork, Joan E. Steinman

All Faculty Scholarship

Late in 1990, Congress passed a statute that confers on the district courts “supplemental jurisdiction” over a universe of claims that the courts otherwise would, or might, be unable to hear. Essentially, 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) authorizes the courts to exercise jurisdiction over claims that are part of the same case or controversy, under Article III of the Constitution, as a claim within the court's original jurisdiction. It explicitly grants jurisdiction over claims that involve the joinder or intervention of additional parties, thereby authorizing what had been dubbed pendent party jurisdiction and some forms of ancillary jurisdiction. It also codifies …

For The Civil Practitioner: Review Of Fourth Circuit Opinions In Civil Cases Decided November 1, 1991 Through December 31, 1992: Vii - Federal Civil Procedure, Joan M. Shaughnessy

Scholarly Articles

Review of Fourth Circuit Opinions in Civil Cases.

Jaws Xvi: The Exceptions That Ate Rule 220, 26 J. Marshall L. Rev. 189 (1993), Charles W. Chapman

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.