Civil Procedure Commons^™

Section 1983, Honorable George C. Pratt, Martin A. Schwartz, Leon Friedman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Right-To-Die, Bruce Morton

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Abortion Rights, Eileen Kaufman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Due Process

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Due Process

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Due Process

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Equal Protection

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Equal Protection

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Equal Protection

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Equal Protection

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Free Exercise Of Religion

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Jurisdiction Of The Supreme Court

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Public Relief And Care

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Separation Of Powers

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Complex Product Design Litigation: A Need For More Capable Fact-Finders, Ora Fred Harris Jr.

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Sounds Of Silence On The Civil Jury, Laura Dooley

Scholarly Works

Juries are hallowed institutions in our constitutional system. They are mentioned not once, but three times in the Bill of Rights, and had been earlier enshrined in Article III. At the heart of our exalted vision of the jury trial is the sense that juries should be reflective of the community which they are supposed to represent in the courtroom. Of course, many members of the relevant community have routinely been excluded from jury service, including women who comprise more than half of the population. Historically, the exclusion of women from civil jury service was a systematic and system-wide practice. …

Giving Notice: An Argument For Notification Of Putative Plaintiffs In Complex Litigation, Marjorie A. Silver

Scholarly Works

Professor Silver advocates recognition of an inherent judicial power to send or authorize notice of pending litigation to potentially interested persons with unfiled claims. Recognizing such a judicial power is consistent with recent legal developments establishing a role for judges in expediting and managing federal litigation. Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure only explicitly provide for notice to potential parties in Rule 23 class action litigation, Professor Silver demonstrates that a more general judicial power to notify putative plaintiffs is consistent with the federal rules and the Constitution. She also shows that the first amendment values support a judicial …

Standing To Intervene, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court has rarely considered what applicants must show to intervene as of right under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2) since the Court amended the provision in 1966. This dearth of Supreme Court treatment has meant that primary responsibility for interpreting Rule 24(a)(2) has devolved upon the lower federal courts. Many of these courts and numerous commentators have recognized that it is very difficult to identify precisely what the Rule demands of those that seek to intervene of right. During much of the last quarter century, however, the federal judiciary agreed about one important proposition: Rule 24(a)(2) does …

Judicial Discretion And The 1983 Amendments To The Federal Civil Rules, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The first section of this Article briefly describes the developments which created the perception that the federal courts were experiencing a litigation explosion and which ultimately led to the promulgation of the 1983 amendments as one response to the perceived explosion. It also examines the substantive content of those changes, especially how the revisions enlarged federal judicial discretion. The second section evaluates the courts' implementation of the 1983 amendments and finds that this application has adversely affected numerous litigants, particularly civil rights plaintiffs, while providing some benefits, namely fostering more expeditious dispute resolution.

The third section provides suggestions for the …

State Of Florida Division Of Administrative Hearings: Order Closing File, William F. Quattlebaum

Historical Documents

Legal documents related to a dispute between the Sawmill Slough Conservation Club vs. the University of North Florida

Working Draft Of Statement Between Sawmill Slough Conservation Club And University Of North Florida, Curtis Bullock

Historical Documents

Legal documents related to a dispute between the Sawmill Slough Conservation Club vs. the University of North Florida

Negotiations Between Sawmill Slough Conservation Club And The University Of North Florida, Curtis Bullock

Historical Documents

Legal documents related to a dispute between the Sawmill Slough Conservation Club vs. the University of North Florida

State Of Florida Division Of Administrative Hearings: Petitioner's Withdrawal Of Request For Administrative Hearing, Timothy Keyser

Historical Documents

Legal documents related to a dispute between the Sawmill Slough Conservation Club vs. the University of North Florida

Joint Press Release, October 8, 1990, Michael Woodward

Historical Documents

Legal documents related to a dispute between the Sawmill Slough Conservation Club vs. the University of North Florida

Understanding Civil Procedure, By Gene R. Shreve And Peter Raven-Hansen, William M. Richman

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

"Inherent Power" And Rule 16, How Far Can A Federal Court Push The Litigant Toward Settlement?, David A. Rammelt

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Factual Frivolity: Sanctioning Clients Under Rule 11—Business Guides, Inc. V. Chromatic Communications Enterprises, 892 F.2d 802 (9th Cir. 1989), Cert. Granted, 110 S. Ct. 3235 (1990), Peter Ramels

Washington Law Review

In Business Guides, Inc v. Chromatic Communications Enterprises, the Ninth Circuit held that clients can be sanctioned under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, if they fail to make an objectively reasonable inquiry to ensure that documents submitted to a court are well grounded in fact. In this case, the Ninth Circuit rejected the subjective good faith standard adopted by the Second Circuit, which held in Calloway v. Marvel Entertainment Group, that clients can be sanctioned only if they knowingly submit claims that are not well grounded in fact. This Note approves of the Business Guides decision, but suggests that …

Rule 11(A) Of The North Carolina Rules Of Civil Procedure: Turner V. Duke University, The New Standards Of Judicial Review, Jennifer Umbaugh

North Carolina Central Law Review

No abstract provided.

Summary Judgment Before The Completion Of Discovery: A Proposed Revision Of Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 56(F), John F. Lapham

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Part I of this Note discusses the purpose of summary judgment in a regime of notice pleading. Part II examines how the federal courts have interpreted and applied rule 56(f). Part III suggests that rule 56(f) be modified to require a more significant factual showing before a court may grant a continuance for further discovery. In addition, Part III examines the policy considerations that support a more stringent rule. Finally, Part IV provides a hypothetical example illustrating the benefits of this proposal.

Fairness To The Absent Members Of A Defendant Class: A Proposed Revision Of Rule 23, Elizabeth Barker Brandt

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.