Courts Commons^™

Bifurcation Unbound, Steven S. Gensler

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

Reconciling The Juridical Links Doctrine With The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure And Article Iii, William D. Henderson

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Over the past three decades, the juridical link and concerted action exceptions have evolved from dicta in the Ninth Circuit's decision in La Mar to an amorphous and undertheorized body of case law that has dangerously merged procedural and jurisdictional issues. Drawing on the principles of class action jurisprudence set forth by the Supreme Court in Amchem and Ortiz, lower courts should consider the issues of class certification and Rule 20(a) joinder before turning to the issue of standing under Article III. Under this approach, courts would not be able to reconcile much of the juridical links case law with …

Recent Efforts To Change Discovery Rules: Advice For Draftsmen Of Rules For State Courts, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Confidentiality, Privilege And Rule 408: The Protection Of Mediation Proceedings In Federal Court, Charles W. Ehrhardt

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Juries, Hindsight, And Punitive Damage Awards: Failures Of A Social Science Case For Change, Richard O. Lempert

Articles

In their recent Arizona Law Review article entitled What Juries Can't Do Well: The Jury's Performance As a Risk Manager,' Professors Reid Hastie and W. Kip Viscusi purport to show that juries are likely to do a poor job in setting punitive damages, largely because jurors cannot avoid the influence of what is called "hindsight bias," or the tendency to see the likelihood of an event higher in retrospect than it would have appeared before it happened. In particular, they argue that hindsight bias and other cognitive biases undermine the utility of jury-set punitive damage awards as risk management devices. …

The New Rules Of Federal Appellate Procedure: Changes In Style And Substance, Warren W. Harris

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

This article discusses the substantive changes to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.

City Of Chicago V. International College Of Surgeons: The Interplay Between Supplemental Jurisdiction And Cross-System Appeals, And The Impact On Federalism, Jacob Edward Daly

Mercer Law Review

In City of Chicago v. International College of Surgeons, the United States Supreme Court reversed a well-established rule in holding that federal district courts may exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims for deferential review of local administrative agency decisions.

Attorney-Client Privilege When The Client Is A Public Official: Litigating The Opening Act Of The Impeachment Drama, Timothy K. Armstrong

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

The divided panel decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in /n re Lindsey, 158 F.3d 1263 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 119 S. Ct. 466 (1998), represented a dramatic shift in that court's thinking on the question whether the attorney-client privilege protects what a government official says to his agency's counsel in confidence. Although the court of appeals in at least four previous decisions had held that a government agency client holds the same privilege any other client would under like circumstances to communicate with counsel in private, the Lindsey court took a quite different view.

Creating The 'Portable' Guardianship: Legal And Practical Implications Of Probate Court Cooperation In Interstate Guardianship Cases, Charlene D. Daniel, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

In this article, we discuss the legal and practical issues associ­ated with interstate guardianships--that is, those guardianships in which the ward has ties to more than one state. Part I addresses these issues in the context of jurisdictional questions, securing nec­essary information, judicial monitoring and enforcement of guardi­anship orders, and property management. Part II proposes some modest solutions to these problems, many borrowed from other ar­eas of law (e.g., child support enforcement, child custody determinations, enforcement of civil protection orders, involuntary civil commitment).

This abstract has been taken from the authors' introduction.

The Arizona Jury Reform Permitting Civil Jury Trial Discussions: The Views Of Trial Participants, Judges, And Jurors, Valerie P. Hans, Paula Hannaford-Agor, G. Thomas Munsterman

Faculty Publications

In 1995, the Arizona Supreme Court reformed the jury trial process by allowing civil jurors to discuss the evidence presented during trial prior to their formal deliberations. This Article examines and evaluates the theoretical, legal, and policy issues raised by this reform and presents the early results of a field experiment that tested the impact of trial discussions. Jurors, judges, attorneys, and litigants in civil jury trials in Arizona were questioned regarding their observations, experi­ences, and reactions during trial as well as what they perceived to be the benefits and drawbacks of juror discussions. The data revealed that the majority …

Foxes Guarding The Chicken Coop: Intervention As Of Right And The Defense Of Civil Rights Remedies, Alan Jenkins

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

This article focuses on the recent spate of cases in which educational institutions on the grounds that their race-conscious admissions policies are unconstitutional. The author analyzes the role of minority students and organizations who are the beneficiaries of those polices at the defendant institutions and their recent attempts to intervene in the lawsuits pursuant to Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. First, the author argues that under the traditional interpretation of Rule 24(a); intervention of right should be granted to minority students and organizations in the great majority of instances. Second, the author looks at the reasons …

Local Procedural Review In The Eighth Circuit, Carl Tobias

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

This article addresses a little known role of the United States Courts of Appeals to review district court procedures. The discussion begins with this role assigned by the Judicial Improvements and Access to Justice Act of 1988 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 83. The article then analyzes how the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit discharges this role.

Jury Reform At The End Of The Century: Real Agreement, Real Changes, Phoebe C. Ellsworth

Articles

Complaints about the jury system and calls for its reform are nothing new-they have probably existed as long as the jury system itself. Warren Burger called for the reform of the civil jury in 1971'; in 1905 William Howard Taft decried the contemporary tendency "to exalt the jury's power beyond anything which is wise or prudent .... ,2 Judges complain to judges, lawyers complain to lawyers, legal academics write articles about the jury for other legal academics, social scientists report their research on juries to other social scientists, and the jurors themselves go home and express their exasperation to their …

The Arizona Jury Reform Permitting Civil Jury Trial Discussions: The View Of Trial Participants, Judges, And Jurors, Valerie P. Hans, Paula Hannaford-Agor, G. Thomas Munsterman

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In 1995, the Arizona Supreme Court reformed the jury trial process by allowing civil jurors to discuss the evidence presented during trial prior to their formal deliberations. This Article examines the theoretical, legal, and policy issues raised by this reform and presents the early results of a field experiment that tested the impact of trial discussions. Jurors, judges, attorneys, and litigants in civil jury trials in Arizona were questioned regarding their observations, experiences, and reactions during trial as well as what they perceived to be the benefits and drawback of juror discussions. The data revealed that the majority of judges …

Caution! Estoppel Ahead: Cleveland V. Policy Management Systems Corporation, Lawrence B. Solum

Faculty Scholarship

The aim of this Commentary is not to argue for a particular resolution of the dispute between Ms. Cleveland and her former employer. Rather, the goal is to address a more general question: Is the Cleveland case an appropriate vehicle for the Supreme Court to endorse the seldom invoked and controversial doctrine of judicial estoppel? That doctrine originated in the needs of a procedural system that was substantially different from the contemporary system, which is shaped by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence. Contemporary understandings of the respective role of judge and jury and …

Allowing Improper Argument Of Counsel To Be Raised For The First Time On Appeal As Fundamental Error: Are Florida Courts Throwing Out The Baby With The Bath Water?, Larry A. Klein

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Abstracting The Record, Terry Crabtree

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Did The Civil Justice Reform Act Of 1990 Actually Expire?, Carl Tobias

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 (CJRA) was intended to reduce the expense and delay associated with federal district court litigation by requiring courts to study and adopt new procedures. The CJRA's gains, however, may be erased by the uncertainty surrounding its sunset provision. Professor Tobias argues that Congress or the Judicial Conference should resolve the uncertainty by proclaiming that the CJRA has expired, thus forcing districts to abrogate procedures inconsistent with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

The Execution Under Oath Of U.S. Litigation Documents: Must Signatures Be Authenticated, 31 J. Marshall L. Rev. 927 (1998), Thomas W. Tobin

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Contracting Access To The Courts: Myth Or Reality? Bane Or Boon?, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Many scholars of the dispute resolution system perceive a sea change in attitudes toward adjudication that took place in the mid-1970s. Among the events of the time included the Pound Conference, which put the Chief Justice of the United States and the national judicial establishment on record in favor of at least some refinement, if not restriction, on access to courts. In addition, Chief Justice Burger, the driving force behind the Pound Conference, also used his bully pulpit as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to promote ADR, particularly court-annexed arbitration. The availability of judicial adjuncts such as court-annexed arbitration …

Nearing The End Of Federal Civil Justice Reform In Montana, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

In continuing the series of essays which evaluate and document the phenomenon of federal civil justice reform, this essay initially affords an update on recent developments in civil justice reform at the national level and in the United States District Court for the District of Montana (Montana District). The essay emphasizes the conclusion of two major studies that analyze the national reform effort and the submission to Congress of reports and a recommendation, which were premised substantially on these studies, by the Judicial Conference of the United States. The essay also stresses the completion by the Ninth Circuit District Local …

The Judicial Conference Report And The Conclusion Of Federal Civil Justice Reform, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The Civil Justice Reform Act (CJRA) of 1990 instituted a nationwide experiment with procedures for decreasing expense and delay in federal civil litigation. Congress required all ninety-four federal district courts to adopt civil justice expense and delay reduction plans and to apply cost and delay reduction measures for at least four years.Congress correspondingly prescribed considerable evaluation of the experimentation which the federal districts undertook. The 1990 legislation mandated that each court annually assess the efficacy of the procedures which the district employed. Moreover, Congress required that an “independent organization with expertise in the area of Federal court management” conduct a …

Why Do Juries Get A Bum Rap: Reflections On The Work Of Valerie Hans, Richard O. Lempert

Articles

The paper by Professor Valerie Hans that I have been asked to comment on examines the widespread expectation that jurors are prepared to hold businesses responsible in tort actions when they would not hold individual actors similarly responsible.1 Two reasons are commonly offered for this expectation. The first is that jurors naturally sympathize with individuals (like themselves) when people sue businesses, either because they identify with the plaintiffs as individuals or because they hold antibusiness attitudes. The second is that because businesses are often wealthy, a "deep pockets" effect exists such that jurors in negligence cases will find for undeserving …

Civil Justice Reform Sunset, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

This article uses the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 (CJRA) as the backdrop for addressing efforts to increase uniformity, simplicity, and transsubstantivity, and to decrease expense and delay in civil litigation. Professor Tobias discusses both the origin and the implementation of the CJRA. By requiring each federal district court to formulate a civil justice expense and delay reduction plan, the purpose of the CJRA is to decrease expense and delay in civil litigation. Professor Tobias argues that the CIRA has been successful because districts have applied techniques that have saved cost and time and have provided new data that …

How Judges View Civil Juries, Paula Hannaford-Agor, B. Michael Dann, G. Thomas Munsterman

Faculty Publications

In any given case, the judge's view of the jury may mani­fest itself as a complex and subtle mixture of respect, gratitude, con­cern, pride, impatience, and even frustration. But more revealing than what judges say about juries is what judges do to prepare jurors for their roles in civil cases. This paper explores the various indicators of judges' views of the civil jury, including the social and institutional factors and contemporary jury reform efforts that affect judges' views about the civil jury.

This abstract has been taken from the authors' introduction.

Relation Back Of "John Doe" Complaints In Federal Court: What You Don't Know Can Hurt You, Steven S. Sparling

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Extending The Due Process Clause To Prevent A Previously Recused Judge From Later Attempting To Affect The Case From Which He Was Recused, S. Matthew Cook

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Some Realism About Federal Procedural Reform, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

A New Confederacy? Disunionism in the Federal Courts is a thought-provoking tour de force about many ills that federal court observers believe plague the modem federal district courts. In Disunionism, Professor Paul Carrington paints a perceptive portrait of the troubling conditions that he asserts impede civil litigation in a number of districts, and he trenchantly criticizes district judges for their contributions to these circumstances while admonishing the Judicial Conference to sweep "our national courts clear of all local clutter."

Simplifying The Choice Of Forum: A Reply, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

We have three things to think about here, as the real estate agents say—“location, location, location.” Accordingly, the two of us have engaged for several years in empirical studies aimed at gauging the effect of forum on case outcome. The results to date strongly suggest that forum really matters. An early piece of the puzzle fell into place in our study of venue. In that article, we examined the benefits and costs of the federal courts scheme of transfer of civil venue “in the interest of justice.” Ours was a pretty straightforward and simple cost-benefit analysis, but we supported it …

Ex Post Facto Laws: Supreme Court New York County People V. Griffin (Decided December 5, 1996

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.