Civil Procedure Commons^™

Choice Of Law In Washington—The Evolution Continues, Philip A. Trautman

Washington Law Review

Twenty years ago an analysis of choice of law principles in the state of Washington concluded with the following observation: "The evolutionary process has finally begun in Washington. It will be a long time in developing. The limitations on that development are only those imposed by the ingenuity, insights and degree of in-depth research and work of counsel and the court."' Much has happened in the twenty years since that statement was made. On the national level, the United States Supreme Court has for the most part withdrawn from the scene and has imposed little control upon the states in …

Civil Rights In Transition: Sections 1981 And 1982 Cover Discrimination On The Basis Of Ancestry And Ethnicity, Eileen Kaufman, Martin A. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Book Review. Privatization And The New Formalism: Making The Courts Safe For Bureaucracy, Bryant G. Garth

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

The Problem Of Selecting A Valuation Date For Property Subject To Equitable Distribution In New York

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Report On Survey Of The Bar, Committee On Federal Courts Of The New York State Bar Association

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rule 11 In The Constitutional Case, Gary J. Saalman, Kenneth Ripple

Journal Articles

The 1983 amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure arose from concern over the flood of litigation in recent years and its high costs to both litigants and the court system. Although the causes of this litigation explosion and the remedies are both many and complex, the pretrial stage of litigation and the standards governing attorney responsibility were considered major contributors to the problem and prime areas for reform. The drafters of the 1983 amendments sought to streamline the litigation process by increasing judicial oversight and deterring abusive or dilatory tactics by the bar. Some of the most significant changes …

International Service Of Process, Armando L. Basarrate,Ii

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Note examines the conflicts that may arise between the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure utilized by American federal courts and procedures under the Service Convention. In addition, this Note compares the logic and policy of the differing approaches utilized by federal courts to resolve such conflicts. Finally, it concludes that the approach which best resolves the legal and practical problems of such conflicts is one which holds that the Service Convention supercedes certain rules of civil procedure when the two conflict.

Public Law Litigation And Legal Scholarship, Richard L. Marcus

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Empirical Studies In Civil Procedure: A Selected Annotated Bibliography, Michael G. Chiorazzi, Barbara A. Baccari, Karen R. Cashion, Christopher R. Hart, Donald M. Nielsen, Charles M. North, William T. O'Neil

Articles

No abstract provided.

Surrogate Parenting After Baby M: The Ball Moves To The Legislature’S Court, John R. Dunne, Gregory V. Serio

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Procedural And Substantive Problems In Complex Litigation Arising From Disasters, Jack B. Weinstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Surrogate Responds: The Need For Reform In Adoption Proceedings, C. Raymond Radigan

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Collision Between New Discovery Amendments And Expert Testimony Rules, Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The young litigator's nightmare was always the same. He was in medieval Europe, ready to engage in a sword fight with the expert swordsman representing his arch rival. After countless hours of preparation, he felt confident that he would be able to hold his own against the swordsman. But when the swordsman drew his lengthy rapier from its sheath, the young attorney pulled only a short dagger from his scabbard. Realizing that he was doomed to defeat, he tossed his dagger into the air and ran from the scene with the laughter of the onlookers ringing in his ears.

The …

Applying Rule 11 To Rid Courts Of Frivolous Litigation Without Chilling The Bar's Creativity, Robin Johnson Collins

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Compelled Participation In Summary Jury Trials: A Tale Of Two Cases, Paul Mattingly

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Schiavone: An Un-Fortune-Ate Illustration Of The Supreme Court's Role As Interpreter Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Joseph P. Bauer

Journal Articles

Let me identify the two basic theses of this paper. First, I believe that in the recent Schiavone v. Fortune case, the Supreme Court gave the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure under consideration there, Rule 15(c), an unduly restrictive reading. In this, the fiftieth year of the effective date of the Rules, it is particularly unfortunate to see any of the Rules given an unnecessarily grudging interpretation. My second assertion is that as a general matter, in interpreting the Federal Rules, courts should recognize that their role is different from the one they play in interpreting statutes or in applying …

Section 1404(A), "Where It Might Have Been Brought": Brought By Whom?, Michael J. Waggoner

Publications

No abstract provided.

Truth And Uncertainty: Legal Control Of The Destruction Of Evidence, Lawrence B. Solum, Stephen Marzen

Faculty Scholarship

This article analyzes legal controls on evidence destruction in more or less six parts. Part I describes the rich variety of authority to control evidence destruction. In civil cases, the spoliation inference, discovery sanctions, tort liability, and criminal obstruction of justice statutes provide sanctions against destruction of evidence. In criminal cases, defendants face fines and imprisonment from federal and state evidence destruction and contempt statutes. Also in criminal cases, prosecutors who destroy exculpatory 1086 evidence risk dismissal of indictments under the process clause, the Jencks Act, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16, and court's supervisory power. In addition, attorneys may …

The Buffalo Creek Disaster: An Effective Supplement To A Conventional Civil Procedure Course, Lawrence M. Grosberg

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Ex Parte Interviews With Enterprise Employees: A Post-Upjohn Analysis, Louis A. Stahl

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Procedure's Magical Number Three: Psychological Bases For Standards Of Decision, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

So many procedural doctrines appear, after research and teaching, to trifurcate. An obvious example is that kind of standard of decision known as the standard of proof: what in theory might have been a continuum of standards divides in practice into the three distinct standards of preponderance of the evidence, clear and convincing evidence, and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Other examples suggest both that I am not imagining the prominence of three and that more than coincidence is at work.

Part I of this essay describes the role of the number three in procedure, with particular regard to standards …

Studying Civil Litigation Through The Class Action, Bryant G. Garth

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Class Actions And Duplicative Litigation, Edward F. Sherman

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Rethinking The Class Action: A Policy Primer On Reform, John C. Coffee Jr.

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Adjudicatory Jurisdiction And Class Actions, Diane P. Wood

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Teaching Civil Procedure With The Aid Of Actual Local Tort Litigation, Lloyd C. Anderson, Charles E. Kirkwood

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Alleging Demand Futility In Federal Court

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Proposal To View Patent Claim Nonobviousness From The Policy Perspective Of Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 52(A), Bradley G. Lane

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note analyzes the scope of appellate review that should be accorded to a trial judge's determination of nonobviousness. Part I details the condition of nonobviousness and how it has evolved into the principal obstacle to patentability. Part II analyzes the Supreme Court and appellate precedents on the scope of review on this issue. Part III evaluates the policy underpinnings of Rule 52(a) and applies a two-pronged analysis to the nonobviousness requirement to determine whether the clearly erroneous standard of review is appropriate. This Note concludes that the treatment of the nonobviousness determination as a question of law cannot be …

The Excessive History Of Federal Rule 15(C) And Its Lessons For Civil Rules Revision, Harold S. Lewis Jr.

Michigan Law Review

This case study of one Federal Rule of Civil Procedure is designed to suggest affirmative answers to these questions. My focus is on the surprisingly extensive body of case law, culminating in the Supreme Court's 1986 decision in Schiavone v. Fortune, that parses the second sentence of Federal Rule 15(c). Added in 1966, that sentence attempts to set standards for the relation back of party-changing amendments to pleadings. A more prototypically pedestrian, less prepossessing topic of the traditionalist type could scarcely be imagined. Yet a review of its history brings larger points into sharp relief: something is seriously amiss in …

The Costs Of Complexity, Stephen B. Burbank

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Complex Litigation: Cases and Materials on Advanced Civil Procedure by Richard L. Marcus and Edward F. Sherman