Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Seattle University School of Law (203)
- University of Michigan Law School (171)
- Universitas Indonesia (123)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (93)
- University of Richmond (59)
-
- Pepperdine University (53)
- William & Mary Law School (42)
- West Virginia University (38)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (37)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (36)
- UIC School of Law (32)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (32)
- Brigham Young University Law School (24)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (23)
- Cornell University Law School (22)
- University of Colorado Law School (22)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (21)
- St. Mary's University (20)
- University of Maine School of Law (19)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (18)
- University of Arkansas Little Rock (17)
- University of Georgia School of Law (17)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (17)
- Duke Law (15)
- Roger Williams University (15)
- Brooklyn Law School (12)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (12)
- Fordham Law School (11)
- Notre Dame Law School (11)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (11)
- Keyword
-
- Civil procedure (103)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (70)
- Federal courts (69)
- Civil Procedure (66)
- Courts (59)
-
- Jurisdiction (55)
- Supreme Court (50)
- Constitution (47)
- Litigation (44)
- Federal (40)
- Federal Courts (38)
- State (36)
- New York (35)
- Due process (33)
- Juries (30)
- Judges (29)
- Court (28)
- Class actions (27)
- Constitutional law (27)
- Discovery (27)
- Law (26)
- Procedure (25)
- Evidence (23)
- Civil rights (21)
- Supreme court (21)
- United States Supreme Court (21)
- Remedies (20)
- Standing (20)
- Trials (20)
- Access to justice (19)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Seattle University Law Review (200)
- "Dharmasisya” Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI (121)
- Michigan Law Review (117)
- Touro Law Review (91)
- Faculty Publications (47)
-
- Faculty Scholarship (46)
- West Virginia Law Review (38)
- Law Faculty Publications (32)
- Articles (31)
- Faculty Articles (29)
- UIC Law Review (29)
- Pepperdine Law Review (27)
- University of Richmond Law Review (27)
- Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal (24)
- Scholarly Works (23)
- BYU Law Review (22)
- Publications (22)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (20)
- Indiana Law Journal (18)
- Supreme Court Case Files (17)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (16)
- Maine Law Review (16)
- Northwestern University Law Review (16)
- Journal Articles (12)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (11)
- Fordham Law Review (10)
- Oklahoma Law Review (10)
- Proche-Orient, Études juridiques (10)
- Scholarly Articles (10)
- Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) (10)
- Publication Type
Articles 721 - 750 of 1471
Full-Text Articles in Courts
The "Test"--Or Lack Thereof--For Issuance Of Virginia Temporary Injunctions: The Current Uncertainty And A Recommended Approach Based On Federal Preliminary Injunction Law, Hon. David W. Lannetti
The "Test"--Or Lack Thereof--For Issuance Of Virginia Temporary Injunctions: The Current Uncertainty And A Recommended Approach Based On Federal Preliminary Injunction Law, Hon. David W. Lannetti
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Ordering Proof: Beyond Adversarial And Inquisitorial Trial Structures, Emily Spottswood
Ordering Proof: Beyond Adversarial And Inquisitorial Trial Structures, Emily Spottswood
Scholarly Publications
In typical trials, judges and juries will find it easier to remember the proof that occurs early in the process over than what comes later. Moreover, once a fact-finder starts to form a working hypothesis to explain the facts of the case, they will be biased towards interpreting new facts in a way that confirms that theory. These two psychological mechanisms will often combine to create a strong “primacy effect,” in which the party who goes first gains a subtle, but significant, advantage over the opposing party. In this article, I propose a new method of ordering proof, designed to …
Perfect Plaintiffs, Cynthia Godsoe
Watson Rounds V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 79 (Sept. 24, 2015), Lena Rieke
Watson Rounds V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 79 (Sept. 24, 2015), Lena Rieke
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
NRS 7.085 allows a district court to make an attorney personally liable for the attorney fees and costs an opponent incurs when the attorney files, maintains or defends a civil action that is not well-grounded in fact or is not warranted by existing law or by a good faith argument for changing the existing law. The Court considered (1) whether NRCP 11 supersedes NRS 7.085 in sanctioning a law firm and (2) whether the district court abused its discretion in sanctioning the law firm under under NRS 7.085. The Court held NRCP 11 does not supersede NRS § 7.085 because …
Voir Dire: Strategy And Tactics In The Defense Of Social And Political Activists, Murray R. Bowes
Voir Dire: Strategy And Tactics In The Defense Of Social And Political Activists, Murray R. Bowes
Akron Law Review
With the courts increasingly being the forum for legal disputes between those who demand change in the superstructure and those who represent (or are) the structure, a rather unfortunate by-product has evolved: a feeling that the courts can no longer adequately dispense justice.8 This manifests itself in beliefs that if one is prosecuted for activities that were designed to advance social change, either in violation of the law or not, that the individual will not be afforded a fair trial; 9 a reflection that the social or political activist will not be judged by an impartial jury….For the purposes of …
Newsroom: Margulies On 'Ghostwriting', Roger Williams University School Of Law
Newsroom: Margulies On 'Ghostwriting', Roger Williams University School Of Law
Life of the Law School (1993- )
No abstract provided.
The American Jury System: A Synthetic Overview, Richard Lempert
The American Jury System: A Synthetic Overview, Richard Lempert
Chicago-Kent Law Review
This essay is intended to provide in brief compass a review of much that is known about the American jury system, including the jury’s historical origins, its political role, controversies over its role and structure, its performance, both absolutely and in comparison to judges and mixed tribunals, and proposals for improving the jury system. The essay is informed throughout by 50 years of research on the jury system, beginning with the 1965 publication of Kalven and Zeisel’s seminal book, The American Jury. The political importance of the jury is seen to lie more in the jury’s status as a one …
The American Jury System: A Synthetic Overview, Richard O. Lempert
The American Jury System: A Synthetic Overview, Richard O. Lempert
Articles
This essay is intended to provide in brief compass a review of much that is known about the American jury system, including the jury’s historical origins, its political role, controversies over its role and structure, its performance, both absolutely and in comparison to judges and mixed tribunals, and proposals for improving the jury system. The essay is informed throughout by 50 years of research on the jury system, beginning with the 1965 publication of Kalven and Zeisel’s seminal book, The American Jury. The political importance of the jury is seen to lie more in the jury’s status as a one …
Resurrecting Trial By Statistics, Jay Tidmarsh
Resurrecting Trial By Statistics, Jay Tidmarsh
Journal Articles
“Trial by statistics” was a means by which a court could resolve a large number of aggregated claims: a court could try a random sample of claim, and extrapolate the average result to the remainder. In Wal-Mart, Inc. v. Dukes, the Supreme Court seemingly ended the practice at the federal level, thus removing from judges a tool that made mass aggregation more feasible. After examining the benefits and drawbacks of trial by statistics, this Article suggests an alternative that harnesses many of the positive features of the technique while avoiding its major difficulties. The technique is the “presumptive judgment”: a …
Trending @ Rwu Law: Professor Niki Kuckes's Post: Litigation Academy Returns, Niki Kuckes
Trending @ Rwu Law: Professor Niki Kuckes's Post: Litigation Academy Returns, Niki Kuckes
Law School Blogs
No abstract provided.
An Appeal To Common Sense: Why "Unappealable" District Court Decisions Should Be Subject To Appellate Review, Matthew D. Heins
An Appeal To Common Sense: Why "Unappealable" District Court Decisions Should Be Subject To Appellate Review, Matthew D. Heins
Northwestern University Law Review
28 U.S.C. § 1291 vests jurisdiction in the United States Circuit Courts of Appeal to hear “appeals from all final decisions of the district courts of the United States.” Various circuit courts have, however, determined that they may only hear appeals of final “judicial” decisions, and that they do not have jurisdiction to hear appeals from final decisions of United States district courts if those decisions are “administrative.” Circuit courts have been loath to explicitly define the dividing line between the two classes of case, and have frequently invoked the potential availability of mandamus review as a means of placating …
At The Fontier Of The Younger Doctrine: Reflections On Google V. Hood, Gil Seinfeld
At The Fontier Of The Younger Doctrine: Reflections On Google V. Hood, Gil Seinfeld
Articles
On December 19, 2014, long-simmering tensions between Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood and the search engine giant Google boiled over into federal court when Google filed suit against the Attorney General to enjoin him from bringing civil or criminal charges against it for alleged violations of the Mississippi Consumer Protection Act. Hood had been investigating and threatening legal action against Google for over a year for its alleged failure to do enough to prevent its search engine, advertisements, and YouTube website from facilitating public access to illegal, dangerous, or copyright protected goods. The case has garnered a great deal of …
Our Unconstitutional Recusal Procedure, Dmitry Bam
Our Unconstitutional Recusal Procedure, Dmitry Bam
Faculty Publications
In this article, I argue that the recusal procedure used in state and federal courts for nearly all of American history is unconstitutional. For centuries, recusal procedure in the United States has largely resembled that of England before American independence. To this day, in most American courtrooms, the judge hearing the case decides whether recusal is required under the applicable substantive recusal rules. If the judge determines that she can act impartially, or that her impartiality could not reasonably be questioned, the judge remains on the case. And although the judge’s decision is typically subject to appellate review — with …
The Supreme Court's New Approach To Personal Jurisdiction, Bernadette Bollas Genetin
The Supreme Court's New Approach To Personal Jurisdiction, Bernadette Bollas Genetin
Akron Law Faculty Publications
In the Supreme Court’s recent general jurisdiction cases, it narrowed general jurisdiction in accord with a “reasonableness” approach to jurisdiction that is consistent with International Shoe’s so-called “forward-looking” face. In the Court’s most recent specific jurisdiction case, Walden v. Fiore, the Court took steps toward assessing specific jurisdiction under a reasonableness analysis, but it ultimately reunited the antagonistic “reasonableness” and territorial power theories to impose artificial limits on specific jurisdiction. The newly narrowed general jurisdiction will not often be available as a “safety valve” to provide jurisdiction in some cases in which jurisdiction would be reasonable under the circumstances. This …
Five Questions After Atlantic Marine, Stephen E. Sachs
Five Questions After Atlantic Marine, Stephen E. Sachs
Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court’s Atlantic Marine ruling did a lot to clear up the law of forum selection. But it also left a number of live questions in place. This essay briefly discusses five of them. When a party wants to move a case to the selected forum, what procedures can it use, other than venue transfer or forum non conveniens? When is a forum selection clause valid and enforceable, as a matter of state or federal law? If the clause isn’t valid, should a federal court still give it any weight? What if there are multiple parties or claims, and …
The Civil Caseload Of The Federal District Courts, Patricia W. Moore
The Civil Caseload Of The Federal District Courts, Patricia W. Moore
Faculty Articles
This Article responds to changes proposed by Congress and the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules to restrict civil lawsuits by reforming procedure. It argues that while these changes are purported to be based on empirical studies, there is no reference to actual government statistics about whether the civil caseload has grown, whether the median disposition time has increased, or whether the most prevalent types of civil cases have changed. Based on statistics published by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, this Article shows that the civil docket has actually stagnated, not exploded. It first looks at trends in …
Brief Of Thirty-Four Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Appellants: Altera Corp. V. Papst Licensing Gmbh, Christopher B. Seaman
Brief Of Thirty-Four Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Appellants: Altera Corp. V. Papst Licensing Gmbh, Christopher B. Seaman
Scholarly Articles
The amici curiae are law professors who teach and write on civil procedure and/or patent law and policy. As such, amici are interested in the effective functioning of the courts and the patent system in general. Amici believe that this Court’s rigid rule restricting personal jurisdiction in patent declaratory judgment actions both flouts Supreme Court precedent and frustrates the public policy of clearing invalid patents. Although amici hold different views on other aspects of modern patent law and policy, they are united in their professional opinion that this Court should overturn its inflexible jurisdictional rule.
The Anti-Plaintiff Pending Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure And The Pro-Defendant Composition Of The Federal Rulemaking Committees, Patricia W. Moore
The Anti-Plaintiff Pending Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure And The Pro-Defendant Composition Of The Federal Rulemaking Committees, Patricia W. Moore
Faculty Articles
For decades, the Civil Rules Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee) has garnered passage of amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) that have incrementally narrowed discovery in the service of the Advisory Committee's stated effort to combat the alleged "cost and delay" of civil litigation. More of the same are on their way to Congress now. In the classical David-and-Goliath lawsuit brought by an individual person against an institutional defendant, these pending amendments hurt David and help Goliath more than any previous round of amendments to the FRCP. The individual versus institution case, not coincidentally, is the most common …
Hryniak: Two Years Later: The Multiple Applications Of ‘That Summary Judgment Case’ From The Supreme Court Of Canada, Jessica Fullerton, Suzie Dunn
Hryniak: Two Years Later: The Multiple Applications Of ‘That Summary Judgment Case’ From The Supreme Court Of Canada, Jessica Fullerton, Suzie Dunn
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
In January 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Hryniak v Mauldin2 and called for a “culture shift” in the approach to summary judgment and the civil justice system more generally. With the ambitious goal of reducing protracted, costly litigation that undermines access to justice – all the while ensuring the fair and just adjudication of disputes – it is surprising that Hryniak has not garnered more attention.
Or has it? It has been nearly two years since the Supreme Court’s call for change was levied. Since that time, Hryniak has been cited more than 800 times …
Recusal Failure, Dmitry Bam
Recusal Failure, Dmitry Bam
Faculty Publications
The American judiciary is suffering from a terrible affliction: biased judges. I am not talking about the subconscious or unconscious biases — stemming from different backgrounds, experiences, ideologies, etc. — that everyone, including judges, harbors. Rather, I am describing invidious, improper biases that lead judges to favor one litigant over another for reasons that almost everyone would agree should play no role in judicial decision-making: the desire to repay a debt of gratitude to those who helped the judge get elected and be reelected.
In this article, I argue that that recusal has failed to prevent biased judges from rendering …
From Commitment To Compliance: Enforceability Of Remedial Orders Of African Human Rights Bodies, Roger-Claude Liwanga
From Commitment To Compliance: Enforceability Of Remedial Orders Of African Human Rights Bodies, Roger-Claude Liwanga
Brooklyn Journal of International Law
Over the last seven decades, there has been a global proliferation of international and regional human rights tribunals. But with no coercive power to enforce their judgments, these international tribunals rely either on the good faith of the State parties or on the political process for the implementation of their remedial orders. This nonjudicial approach to enforcement has showed its limits, as most State parties are noncompliant with international judgments to the detriment of human rights victims. This article recommends a new approach involving the judicialization of the post-adjudicative stage of international proceedings as an avenue to increase the enforceability …
Civil-Izing Federalism, Brooke Coleman
Civil-Izing Federalism, Brooke Coleman
Faculty Articles
When Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito joined the United States Supreme Court, most commentators predicted it would become more conservative. Indeed, many believed that the reinvigorated federalism revolution under Chief Justice Rehnquist would, if anything, become more robust under the new chief. To a large degree, those commentators were right; the Court has decided numerous hotly contested federalism cases along predictable ideological lines. But there are some important counterexamples in the Court’s federalism jurisprudence. In a list of cases about access to plaintiff-friendly state courts, the Justices seem to abandon their federalism principles. Instead, the liberal wing of the …
Deselecting Biased Juries, Scott W. Howe
Deselecting Biased Juries, Scott W. Howe
Utah Law Review
Critics of peremptory-challenge systems commonly contend that they inevitably inflict “inequality harm” on many excused persons and should be abolished. Ironically, the Supreme Court fueled this argument with its decision in Batson v. Kentucky by raising and endorsing the inequality claim sua sponte and then purporting to solve it with an approach that preserved peremptories. This Article shows, however, that the central problem is something other than inequality harm to excused persons. The central problem is the harm to disadvantaged litigants when their opponents use peremptories to secure a one-sided jury. This problem can arise often—whenever a venire is slanted …
Rationalizing Cost Allocation In Civil Discovery, A. Benjamin Spencer
Rationalizing Cost Allocation In Civil Discovery, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
A movement is afoot to revise the longstanding presumption that in civil litigation the producing party bears the cost of production in response to discovery requests. An amendment to Rule 26( c )-which took effect in December 2015-makes explicit courts' authority to issue protective orders that shift discovery costs away from producing parties. But this authority is not new; what is new is what may be coming next-an undoing of the producer-pays presumption itself. Thus far, the sentiment to move in this direction has been slightly below the radar, advocated by probusiness interest groups and advocates before the Advisory Committee …
Civil Justice Initiative: The Landscape Of Civil Litigation In State Courts, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Scott Graves, Shelley Spacek Miller
Civil Justice Initiative: The Landscape Of Civil Litigation In State Courts, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Scott Graves, Shelley Spacek Miller
Faculty Publications
This study was undertaken to inform the deliberations of the Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) Civil Justice Improvements Committee as it developed recommendations based on evidence-based practices to improve civil case processing in state courts. Much of the debate concerning the American justice system focuses on procedural issues that add complexity to civil litigation, resulting in additional cost and delay and undermining access to justice. Many commentators are alarmed by the increasing privatization of the civil justice system and particularly by the dramatic decline in the rates of civil bench and jury trials. In addition, substantially reduced budgetary resources since …
Lawrence V. Texas: The Decision And Its Implications For The Future, Martin A. Schwartz
Lawrence V. Texas: The Decision And Its Implications For The Future, Martin A. Schwartz
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Qualified Immunity: The Constitutional Analysis And Its Application, Karen Blum
Qualified Immunity: The Constitutional Analysis And Its Application, Karen Blum
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Bigger Isn’T Always Better: An Analysis Of Court Efficiency Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling, Teresa Dalton, Jordan M. Singer
Bigger Isn’T Always Better: An Analysis Of Court Efficiency Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling, Teresa Dalton, Jordan M. Singer
Pace Law Review
One important measure of trial court efficiency is overall case length—that is, the elapsed time from a case’s initial filing to its final disposition. Using a large, recent dataset from nearly 7000 federal civil cases, we find that two variables are particularly useful in predicting overall case length: the total number of attorneys filing an appearance in the case, and the number of authorized judgeships for a given district court. Further, we find a significant and surprising interaction between these two variables, indicating that smaller courts are more efficient than larger courts at processing civil cases when more than three …
To Be Or Not To Be: The Forum Non Conveniens Performance Acted Out On Anglo-American Courtroom Stages, Alan Reed
Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law
No abstract provided.
The Confusing Standards For Discretionary Review In Washington And A Proposed Framework For Clarity, Judge Stephen Dwyer
The Confusing Standards For Discretionary Review In Washington And A Proposed Framework For Clarity, Judge Stephen Dwyer
Seattle University Law Review
It has now been more than thirty-five years since the Washington Rules of Appellate Procedure (RAP) became effective in 1976 and replaced all prior rules governing appellate procedure. One significant change that those rules made was to clearly describe and delineate a procedural mechanism for seeking interlocutory review of trial court decisions. The ultimate effect on practitioners is both obvious and unavoidable. Many lawyers, rather than stake out a clear position regarding the applicability of the various considerations governing discretionary review, simply argue that any and every consideration that is even arguably applicable is satisfied by the trial court’s determination. …