Courts Commons^™

How Employment-Discrimination Plaintiffs Fare In The Federal Courts Of Appeals, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg, Stewart J. Schwab

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Employment-discrimination plaintiffs swim against the tide. Compared to the typical plaintiff, they win a lower proportion of cases during pretrial and after trial. Then, many of their successful cases are appealed. On appeal, they have a harder time in upholding their successes, as well in reversing adverse outcome.

This tough story does not describe some tiny corner of the litigation world. Employment-discrimination cases constitute an increasing fraction of the federal civil docket, now reigning as the largest single category of cases at nearly 10 percent.

In this article, we use official government data to describe the appellate phase of this …

Mixed Up About Mixed Motive: What Will Trigger A "Mixed Motive" Analysis In Title Vii Cases? An Analysis Of Desert Palace, Inc. V. Costa, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa, 539 U.S. 90, 2003. The author expected the Court to clarify and define the circumstances in which it is appropriate to use the "mixed-motive model" to prove a violation of Title VII under the disparate treatment theory.

Helping The Pro Se Litigant: A Changing Landscape, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

This article describes how the influx of self-represented litigants has forced many within the court and legal communities to reconsider some of the fundamental premises on which the civil justice system is based and to respond in new and creative ways to changing litigant demands on existing court and legal resources. It focuses on changes to the delivery of legal services to low- and moderate-income people, especially the emergence of “unbundled” legal services, and addresses the practical implications related to the distinction between legal information and legal advice. Finally, it describes how judges and court staff are rethinking the conceptual …

The Reliability Of The Administrative Office Of The U.S. Courts Database: An Initial Empirical Analysis, Theodore Eisenberg, Margo Schlanger

Articles

Researchers have long used federal court data assembled by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO) and the Federal Judicial Center (FJC). The data include information about every case filed in federal district court and every appeal filed in the twelve nonspecialized federal appellate courts. Much research using the AO data spans subject matter areas, and includes articles on appeals, caseloads and case-processing times, case outcomes, the relation between demographics and case outcomes, class actions, diversity jurisdiction, and litigation generally. Other research using the AO data covers particular subject matter areas, such as inmate cases, contract cases, corporate litigation, …

An Argument For Reviving The Actual Futility Exception To The Supreme Court's Procedural Default Doctrine, Brent E. Newton

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Seeing The Appellate Horizon: Civil Trial Strategy And Standards Of Review In The Eighth Circuit, R. Christopher Lawson

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

"Can We Go Home Now?" Expediting Adoption And Termination Of Parental Rights Appeals In Ohio State Courts, Susan C. Wawrose

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

The Expedited Appeals Process For The District Of Columbia Court Of Appeals, Bonny L. Tavares

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Expedited Appeals In Kentucky, Susan Hanley Kosse, Kristen S. Miller

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

To Expediency And Beyond: Vermont's Rocket Docket, Tracy Bach

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

New Hampshire's Three-Judge Expedited Docket, Joseph P. Nadeau

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Appellate Procedure In West Virginia: Why Rule 4a'S Expedited Petition Process Isn't Attractive To Attorneys, Grace Wigal

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Freestyle Lawyering: Taking An Expedited Appeal In The New York State Courts, Alicia R. Ouellette

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Expedited Appeals In Indiana: Too Little, Too Late, Joel M. Shumm

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

The Right To Trial By Jury In Arkansas After Merger Of Law And Equity, John J. Watkins

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Possible, But Not Likely: Expedited Appeals In Massachusetts, Davalene Cooper

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

A Practitioner's Guide To Arkansas's New Judicial Article, Larry Brady, J.D. Gingerich

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Recognition And Enforcement Of Foreign Judgments In The United States: The Need For Federal Legislation, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 229 (2003), Violeta I. Balan

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

'Can We Go Home Now?' Expediting Adoption And Termination Of Parental Rights Appeals In Ohio State Courts, Susan Wawrose

School of Law Faculty Publications

Two years ago, the Ohio Supreme Court amended its rules and those of Ohio's intermediate appellate courts in order to fast-track appeals of cases involving termination of parental rights ("TPR") and adoption of minor children. Three of Ohio's twelve appellate districts already had local rules to expedite or accelerate these types of appeals, but in some districts, the amended rules established procedures that were entirely new.

The major impetus behind the court's amendments to the rules was to move children out of foster care and into permanent adoptive homes more quickly. Further, by amending the rules of the intermediate appellate …

U.S. Jury Reform: The Active Jury And The Adversarial Ideal, Valerie P. Hans

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In many countries, lay people participate as decision makers in legal cases. Some countries include their citizens in the justice system as lay judges or jurors, who assess cases independently. The legal systems of other nations combine lay and law-trained judges who decide cases together in mixed tribunals. The International Conference on Lay Participation in the Criminal Trial in the 21st Century provided useful contrasts among different methods of incorporating lay voices into criminal justice systems worldwide. Systems with inquisitorial methods are more likely to employ mixed courts, whereas adversarial systems more often use juries. Research presented at the Conference …

The Communities That Make Standards Of Care Possible, Anita Bernstein

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Plaintiphobia In The Appellate Courts: Civil Rights Really Do Differ From Negotiable Instruments, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Professors Clermont and Eisenberg conducted a systematic analysis of appellate court behavior and report that defendants have a substantial advantage over plaintiffs on appeal. Their analysis attempted to control for different variables that may affect the decision to appeal or the appellate outcome, including case complexity, case type, amount in controversy, and whether there had been a judge or a jury trial. Once they accounted for these variables and explored and discarded various alternate explanations, they came to the conclusion that a defendants' advantage exists probably because of appellate judges' misperceptions that trial level adjudicators are pro-plaintiff.

Federal Class Action Reform In The United States: Past And Future And Where Next?, Edward H. Cooper

Articles

Predicting the likely future developments in class action practice in the federal courts of the United States must begin in the past.

Access To Justice For The Self-Represented Litigant: An Interdisciplinary Investigation By Designers And Lawyers, Ronald W. Staudt, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

To assist courts, the National Center for State Courts, in partnership with the Illinois Institute of Technology's Institute of Design and the Chicago-Kent College of Law, launched a research project to examine court processes and recommend modifications to eliminate or reduce procedural barriers to access for self-represented litigants. The projects had three major tasks: (1) to identify major barriers to access to justice that self-represented litigants encounter due to court procedures and administrative requirements; (2) to employ system design methodology to redesign court processes to remove those barriers, and (3) to translate the conceptual model for redesigned court system into …

Swallowing The Apple Whole: Improper Patent Use By Local Rule, Ellisen S. Turner

Michigan Law Review

During patent infringement litigation, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("FRCP") and the federal district court's local rules govern the parties' pretrial discovery and motion practice. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has adopted the most comprehensive local rules to date covering pretrial procedures in the patent litigation context. The Northern District of California Patent Local Rules ("Local Rules") may come to have a significant impact throughout the federal courts, as it appears that other jurisdictions and commentators are looking to the Local Rules for guidance. For instance, the American Bar Association Section of Intellectual Property …

Can We Talk?: Removing Counterproductive Ethical Restraints Upon Ex Parte Communication Between Attorneys And Adverse Expert Witnesses, Stephen D. Easton

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Outrageous Opponents: How To Stop Them In Closing Argument, Ronald L. Carlson, Michael S. Carlson

Popular Media

Most attorneys try to sum up their cases in a fashion that comports with accepted law and local practice. All too frequently, however, one has the misfortune of running into Rambo, the over-the-top opponent. Before his peroration is concluded, Rambo has trampled on the law of trial practice by making half a dozen improper arguments. He urges evidence that never came up at trial. He injects hearsay into the proceedings. He adds his own opinions about which witnesses were lying and the legal fault of your client. And, this is just the beginning. Adding insult to injury, the unjust tactics …

Thou Shall Not Strike: Religion-Based Peremptory Challenges Under The Washington State Constitution, Justin Dolan

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment will first define the peremptory challenge and discuss its history and normative values. It will then examine the United States Supreme Court's treatment of the peremptory challenge, focusing on how the peremptory challenge has changed from a litigation device that lawyers could exercise without explanation to one that at times requires an explanation for it to survive constitutional challenge. Next, this Comment will discuss state courts' independent interpretation of fundamental rights, Washington courts' decisions in harmony with this principle, and State v. Gunwall, the guide to independent constitutional interpretation in Washington. This Comment will show that under …

Public Interest Litigation In A Comparative Context, Jayanth K. Krishnan

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Politics And Sociology In Federal Civil Rulemaking: Errors Of Scope, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

In April 2000 the United States Supreme Court promulgated a package of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that took effect on December 1, 2000, without Congressional intervention. As one commentator observed, “(a)ll of (the proposed amendments) promise to have a significant effect on discovery practice.” One Proposed Amendment--narrowing the scope of discovery available pursuant to Rule 26(b)(1)--was particularly controversial before both the Advisory Committee, the Standing Committee, and the Judicial Conference. Nonetheless, the Proposed Amended Rule narrowing scope proceeded from the Court to finality with no intervention by Congress. Proponents of the change minimized criticism by …