Courts Commons^™

Beyond The Hero Judge: Institutional Reform Litigation As Litigation, Margo Schlanger

Reviews

In 1955, in its second decision in Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court suggested that federal courts might be called upon to engage in long-term oversight of once-segregated schools. Through the 1960s, southern resistance pushed federal district and appellate judges to turn that possibility into a reality. The impact of this saga on litigation practice extended beyond school desegregation, and even beyond the struggle for African-American equality; through implementation of Brown, the nation’s litigants, lawyers, and judges grew accustomed both to issuance of permanent injunctions against state and local public institutions, and to extended court oversight of compliance. …

State Immunity Waivers For Suits By The United States, Evan H. Caminker

Articles

The Supreme Court closed this millennium with a virtual celebration of state sovereignty, protecting state authority from the reach of congressional power in several significant ways. In a pair of cases, Seminole Tribe v. Florida1 and Alden v. Maine,2 the Court held that states enjoy a constitutional immunity from being sued without their consent. In Seminole Tribe, the Court opined that "the background principle of state sovereign immunity embodied in the Eleventh Amendment"3 protects states from unconsented suits in federal court. In Alden, the Court held that this principle is not merely embodied in the Eleventh Amendment but rather is …

When To Hear The Hearsay: A Proposal For A New Rule Of Evidence Designed To Protect The Constitutional Right Of The Criminally Accused To Confront The Witnesses Against Her, 32 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1287 (1999), Scott A. Smith

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Right To Inspect And Test Breath Alcohol Machines: Suspicion Ain't Proof, 33 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (1999), Gil Sapir, Mark Giangrande

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

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 …

Sticks And Stones, Phoebe C. Ellsworth

Articles

I believe that research should be refuted by research. More and more of our scarce journal space is being taken up by attacks, rebuttals, and rebuttals to the rebuttals, often ending with a whimper of recognition that the adversaries were not so very far apart to begin with, and that the only way (if possible) to resolve the disagreement is through empirical research. Communication of scientific disagreement does not require a published article. Grant proposals and manuscripts submitted to refereed journals like this one are sent out to reviewers, who provide written evaluations that are communicated to the author. Papers …

Less Reliable Preliminary Hearings And Plea Bargains In Criminal Cases In California: Discovery Before And After Proposition 115 , Laura Berend

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Practice, Richard Mills

Mercer Law Review

The formula for success in trial practice is simple: Be prepared, be decent, and be on time.

There are ninety-four district courts in the United States. Twenty-four states have two or more districts; for example, Illinois and Georgia have three. Twenty-six states, plus the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands, are single districts. And in all of those ninety-four districts over the last thirty years, the civil cases have tripled! In my district we have quadrupled our caseload in that same time frame. In the last five years alone, we have had …

Amchem Products, Inc. V. Windsor: The Supreme Court Defines The Standard For Settlement Class Action Certification, Jimmy White

Mercer Law Review

In Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor, a case stemming from the asbestos litigation crisis of the 1970s and 1980s, the United States Supreme Court addressed the certification criteria for settlement-only class actions under rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("Rule 23").

Plain Meaning, Practical Reason, And Cuplability: Toward A Theory Of Jury Interpretation Of Criminal Statutes, Darryl K. Brown

Michigan Law Review

In one of the few existing recordings of American juries deliberating in an actual criminal case, Wisconsin v. Reed, we observe jurors struggling with how they should apply a statute in a case in which the facts are not in real dispute. The defendant is charged with felon in possession of a gun, and all agree that he has a felony record and owned a pistol until he turned it over to the police upon their request. The statute contains three elements. The defendant must (a) have a felony conviction, (b) have possessed a gun, and (c) have known that …

Brandeis, Progressivism, And Commercial Law: Rethinking Benedict V. Ratner, Edward J. Janger

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

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.

Reverse-Cost-Shifting: A New Proposal For Allocating Legal Expenses, 32 J. Marshall L. Rev. 35 (1998), Ephraim Fischbach, William Mclauchlan

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

A More Complete Look At Complexity, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

The ability of courts to successfully resolve complex cases has been a matter of contentious debate, not only for the last quarter-century, but for most of the twentieth century. This debate has been part of the legal landscape at least since Judge Jerome Frank's polemic book from which this Symposium derives its title, and probably since Roscoe Pound's famous address to the American Bar Association. During the 1980s and 1990s in particular, the battlelines of the pro-and anti-court debate have been brightly drawn. Some commentators, most reliably successful plaintiffs' counsel and politically liberal academics, defend the judicial track record in …

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 …

Naked Politics, Federal Courts Law, And The Canon Of Acceptable Arguments, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

In this Article, I argue that there is a wide gap between the aspirations and the actual operation of Federal Courts law. I maintain that, despite the conversational rule forbidding it, raw substance in fact wields significant influence in the resolution of Federal Courts issues. For example, the familiar argument that federal courts should be favored because they are more "sympathetic" to federal claims is really an appeal to naked politics. The empirical premise of this and other arguments of naked politics is that there are structural differences between federal and state courts which affect the outcomes of close cases, …

Night And Day: Coeur D’Alene, Breard, And The Unraveling Of The Prospective-Retrospective Distinction In Eleventh Amendment Doctrine, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Supreme Court's decision in Edelman v. Jordan has been read to establish a distinction between suits seeking prospective relief from a state official's violation of federal law (which are not barred by the Eleventh Amendment under Ex parte Young) and suits seeking retrospective relief from the state (which are barred by the Eleventh Amendment, even if the officer is the defendant). Commentators and the lower courts have long had difficulty understanding and applying the distinction. Until recently, the principal effect of the Edelman line of cases has been to bar suits seeking damages and similar monetary relief from …

Rescuing Multidistrict Litigation From The Altar Of Expediency, Carter G. Phillips, Gene C. Schaerr, Anil K. Abraham

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

When Physicians Balk At Futile Care: Implications Of The Disability Rights Laws, Philip G. Peters Jr.

Faculty Publications

Part I of this article reviews the factual background of the futility debate. Part II introduces the antidiscrimination laws. Thereafter, Parts III, IV, and V examine the three components of the proposal suggested above.

No More Excuses: Closing The Door On The Voluntary Intoxication Defense, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 535 (1997), Chad J. Layton

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Intruders At The Death House: Limiting Third-Party Intervention In Executive Clemency, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 567 (1997), Daryl M. Schumacher

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Race-Based Jury Nullification: Case-In-Chief, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 911 (1997), Paul D. Butler

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Race-Based Jury Nullification: Rebuttal (Part B), 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 929 (1997), Charles P. Kocoras

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Race-Based Jury Nullification: Surrebuttal, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 933 (1997), Paul D. Butler

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Analysis Of People, For Michigan Republic, Ex Rel V. State Of Michigan, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 937 (1997), Phillip A. Hendges

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Going To Trial: A Rare Throw Of The Die, Samuel R. Gross, Kent D. Syverud

Articles

If it is true, as we often hear, that we are one of the most litigious societies on earth, it is because of our propensity to sue, not our affinity for trials. Of the hundreds of thousands of civil lawsuits that are filed each year in America, the great majority are settled; of those that are not settled, most are ultimately dismissed by the plaintiffs or by the courts; only a few percent are tried to a jury or a judge. This is no accident. We prefer settlements and have designed a system of civil justice that embodies and expresses …

Scientific Testing & Proof Of Paternity: Some Controversy And Key Issues For Family Law Counsel, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

Blood and tissue testing, especially DNA matching, have become important elements of both criminal and paternity or maternity litigation. Such scientific testing has become so important that it has taken on aspects that may cause it to benefit or to do harm to the judicial process or to any given case. This article focuses on the value and the dangers surrounding this interesting subject.

The 1995 Louisiana Supreme Court decision in Pace v. State reemphasized the importance of DNA testing generally and the significance of blood and tissue genetic testing used to exclude paternity. The advances in and importance of …

What Is Eleventh Amendment Immunity?, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Supreme Court's Eleventh Amendment decisions give conflicting signals about what the Amendment does. On one view, the Amendment functions as a forum-allocation principle--immunizing states from liability in suits filed in federal court, but leaving open the possibility that states may be compelled to entertain suits against themselves in their own courts. A separate line of cases, however, implies that state courts enjoy an immunity from suit in their own courts and that nothing in the Constitution withdraws such immunity; on this view, the Eleventh Amendment, by protecting the states from suit in the federal courts, effectively immunizes the states …

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 …