Courts Commons^™

Piper Aircraft V. Reyno, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Restating Territorial Jurisdiction And Venue For State And Federal Courts, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

"Jurisdiction must become venue," concluded Professor Albert A. Ehrenzweig. Perhaps it should. More certain is the proposition that comprehending jurisdiction requires mastering its relationship with venue. Such conclusions lie at some distance, however, bringing to mind that every journey must begin with a single step. A solid first step takes me to the subject of this Symposium, the Restatement (Second) of Judgments. This, put simply, is a masterful work. Even while still in tentative drafts, it proved an invaluable aid to judge, practitioner, teacher, and student. Yet in a work of such scope, anyone could find grounds for differing. …

Voir Dire In Kentucky: An Empirical Study Of Voir Dire In Kentucky Circuit Courts, William H. Fortune

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Voir dire is the stage of a jury trial at which prospective jurors are questioned under oath by court or counsel to determine their suitability as jurors in the case to be tried. Kentucky's high court has repeatedly recognized the importance of voir dire to the exercise of for-cause and peremptory challenges.

The trial judge's wide discretion in voir dire, however, necessarily makes a review of appellate decisions of minimal assistance in ascertaining what actually occurs during this important phase of a jury trial. Published opinions provide little guidance in this area; information about voir dire must come from a …

The Virginia Judicial Council's Intermediate Appellate Court Proposal, Martha B. Brissette

University of Richmond Law Review

The ever-expanding volume of appellate litigation in Virginia has engendered a crisis in appellate justice in this state which can be adequately addressed only by the creation of an intermediate appellate court. Not only is Virginia the most populous state without such an intermediate court, its highest court also has the largest caseload of any single state appellate court.

Court Examination Of The Discovery File On A Motion For Summary Judgment, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note examines the history and ambiguous language of rule 56 to determine whether courts have a duty to examine the discovery file before granting a summary judgment. Section I discusses courts' differing interpretations of the rule. Section II shows that the Supreme Court Advisory Committee which drafted the rule contemplated that courts would examine routinely filed discovery materials when considering a motion for summary judgment. Section III concludes, however, that the expansion of pre-trial discovery since the enactment of the federal rules renders such a trial court duty inconsistent with the drafters' intent that the rules "be construed to …

Maryland V. Louisiana, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Discovery Problems In Civil Cases, Joseph L. Ebersole, Barlow Burke

Federal Judicial Center Reports

This publication is a product of a study undertaken in furtherance of the Center's statutory mission to conduct and stimulate research and development on matters of judicial administration. The analyses, conclusions, and points of view are those of the authors. This work has been subjected to staff review within the Center, and publication signifies that it is regarded as responsible and valuable. It should be emphasized, however, that on matters of policy, the Center speaks only through its Board.

Jury Instructions V. Jury Charges, J. Patrick Jones

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Applicability Of Rule 23(E) To Precertification Proceedings: The Functional Approach Applied, Kevin Silverang

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Federal Practice And Procedure - Comment - Appealability And Finality In The Third Circuit - Is The United States Supreme Court More Appealing Than The Third Circuit, Gary A. Rome

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

The Summary Jury Trial, Thomas D. Lambros, Thomas H. Shunk

Cleveland State Law Review

The American judicial system must necessarily rely on a steady flow of dispositions of cases by settlement lest it collapse because of a demand for trials beyond the ability of the courts to try cases. Settlements are achieved through a variety of procedures and techniques, yet many cases result in trials because of the uncertainty about prospective juror perceptions that pervades settlement discussions. Summary trial helps to eliminate this element of uncertainty and, at the same time, provides an additional basis for settlement of cases otherwise committed to trial. This is not to suggest that trial is to be avoided …

The Summary Jury Trial, Thomas D. Lambros, Thomas H. Shunk

Cleveland State Law Review

The American judicial system must necessarily rely on a steady flow of dispositions of cases by settlement lest it collapse because of a demand for trials beyond the ability of the courts to try cases. Settlements are achieved through a variety of procedures and techniques, yet many cases result in trials because of the uncertainty about prospective juror perceptions that pervades settlement discussions. Summary trial helps to eliminate this element of uncertainty and, at the same time, provides an additional basis for settlement of cases otherwise committed to trial. This is not to suggest that trial is to be avoided …

United States Of America V. Herman Raddatz, Preview Of United States Supreme Court Cases, Leroy Pernell

Journal Publications

No abstract provided.

Questioning Intervention Of Right -- Toward A New Methodology Of Decisionmaking, Gene R. Shreve

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Inquiries Into The Numerical Division Of Juries: Ellis V. Reed, James M. O'Brien

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rush V. Savchuk, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

United States Parole Commission V. Geraghty, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

When A District Court Has Stayed A Claim Involving Concurrent Jurisdiction, Issuance Of A Writ Of Mandamus Compelling Adjudication Is Improper., James P. Keenan

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract Forthcoming.

Federal District Courts Have No Authority To Interrupt Preexisting State Sentence To Impose Confinement For Civil Contempt., Diane E. Hepford

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract Forthcoming.

The 1979 Civil Procedure Rules, James W. Spears

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Proposed Citizens Right To Standing Act-Finding The Keys To Unlock The Courthouse Doors, Harold W. Wood, Jr.

Seattle University Law Review

Recent Supreme Court decisions severely restrict the right of citizens to litigate in federal courts. The Court's standing requirements not only limit the ability of citizens to successfully invoke federal court jurisdiction, but also confuse lower courts and litigants attempting to apply the requirements. Standing requirements have met with increasing criticism. And Congress is now considering legislative modification of standing doctrine. Unfortunately, the Court's employment of constitutional foundations in establishing current standing requirements imposes substantial roadblocks Congress must avoid to enact remedial standing legislation. This comment examines the constitutional and pragmatic difficulties of statutory modification of standing requirements and recommends …

Shaffer V. Heitner: A Death Warrant For The Transient Rule Of In Personam Jurisdiction, Daniel O. Bernstine

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Federal Practice And Procedure, Various Editors

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Civil Litigation And Jura Novit Curia, Lawrence G. Baxter

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Influence Of Jury Deliberation On Juror Perception Of Trial, Credibility, And Damage Awards, S. Femi Sonaike

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Survey Of Literature On Discovery From 1970 To The Present: Expressed Dissatisfactions And Proposed Reforms, Daniel Segal

Federal Judicial Center Reports

Eight years have passed since the last major revision of the discovery provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. During those years, there has been a substantial amount of writing on the discovery rules. While much of it has been aimed at helping practitioners understand the rules, a large portion has been critical in nature, examining how well the rules are functioning, isolating their problem areas and making suggestions for reform. It was the purpose of the study on which this Report is based to survey and analyze that critical literature. The Report's first section sets out in detail …

Judicial Controls And The Civil Litigative Process: Discovery, Paul R. Connolly, Edith A. Holleman, Michael J. Kuhlman

Federal Judicial Center Reports

This report should be viewed as a beginning. It explores from one perspective the operation of the federal rules governing discovery as revealed in more than 7,000 docketed requests appearing in more than 3,000 terminated cases in six United States district courts, (A survey of practitioners in the six districts suggests that the docketed requests cover the great bulk of discovery activity.) The report is a continuation of the Center's District court studies Project, the first report of which (Case Management and Court Management in United States District Court) appeared several months ago.

Is Justice Delayed? A Report From The Court Administrator, C. R. Huie, G. Lawrence Jegley

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Courts-Rules Of Civil Procedure-Postjudgment Motion To Intervene To Appeal Denial Of Class Certification Is Timely-United Airlines, Inc. V. Mcdonald

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Sentencing Alternatives For Virginia General District Courts, Jose R. Davila Jr., Robert L. Mordhorst

University of Richmond Law Review

The endless parade of humanity that passes before the benches of Virginia's general district courts accused of minor offenses presents to those charged with deciding these cases one of the most challenging judicial tasks of our day. The challenge in addition to deciding guilt or innocence is also determining what to do with those judged guilty. Those decisions influence to one degree or another the direction of peoples lives for their own and society's good or ill. Most of the offenders appearing before these courts are young people, often first offenders. The behavior patterns of their lives are not yet …