Courts Commons^™

Chevron On Stilts: A Response To Jonathan Siegel, Philip A. Hamburger

Faculty Scholarship

Whither Chevron? For several years, some justices of the Supreme Court have been questioning Chevron deference, partly on the basis of my constitutional critique of it. It was inevitable that someone would stand up in defense of that doctrine, and I am glad to say that my estimable former colleague Jonathan Siegel has stepped up to the plate. But the defense of the indefensible is not easy.

Although the long-standing conventional critique of Chevron was that it violates the separation of powers and federalism, my criticism is that Chevron deference corrupts the judicial process. As adumbrated in my 2014 …

The Keys To The Kingdom: Judges, Pre-Hearing Procedure, And Access To Justice, Colleen F. Shanahan

Faculty Scholarship

Judges see themselves as – and many reforming voices urge them to be – facilitators of access to justice for pro se parties in our state civil and administrative courts. Judges’ roles in pro se access to justice are inextricably linked with procedures and substantive law, yet our understanding of this relationship is limited. Do we change the rules, judicial behavior, or both to help self-represented parties? We have begun to examine this nuanced question in the courtroom, but we have not examined it in a potentially more promising context: pre-hearing motions made outside the courtroom. Outside the courtroom, judges …

Appeals Court Denies Sperm Donor Paternity Test, Arthur S. Leonard

Other Publications

No abstract provided.

The "Broadest Reasonable Interpretation" And Applying Issue Preclusion To Administrative Patent Claim Construction, Jonathan I. Tietz

Michigan Law Review

Inventions are tangible. Yet patents comprise words, and words are imprecise. Thus, disputes over patents involve a process known as “claim construction,” which formally clarifies the meaning of a patent claim’s words and, therefore, the scope of the underlying property right. Adversarial claim construction commonly occurs in various Article III and Article I settings, such as district courts or the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). When these proceedings ignore each other’s claim constructions, a patent’s scope can become inconsistent and unpredictable. The doctrine of issue preclusion could help with this problem. The Supreme Court recently reemphasized in B & …

Neither Limited Nor Simplified: A Proposal For Reform Of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 222(B), Michael S. Smith

Michigan Law Review

A limited and simplified discovery system should broaden access to courts, resolve disputes quickly, and expedite relief to injured parties. It should not incentivize procedural gamesmanship or increase the system’s complexity. Regrettably, Illinois’s “limited and simplified” discovery system does both. The initiation procedure for the simplified system, Rule 222(b), creates procedural traps and perverse incentives for both plaintiffs and defendants, and conflicting appellate interpretations of the Rule intensify the problem. This Note examines the flaws underlying the current simplified discovery scheme and argues for reform. It examines simplified discovery schemes in other states to recommend a new system for initiating …

Introduction: Canada's Chief Justice: Beverley Mclachlin's Legacy Of Law And Leadership, Marcus Moore

All Faculty Publications

Summarizes the legacy of law and leadership of Beverley McLachlin, the longest-serving Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada (2000-2017), and first female Chief Justice.

Justice As Harmony: The Distinct Resonance Of Chief Justice Beverley Mclachlin's Juridical Genius, Marcus Moore

All Faculty Publications

Chief Justice McLachlin’s juridical work has earned special praise, but what specifically distinguishes it among the work of other leading jurists has proven elusive for lawyers and social scientists to identify. My experience as a law clerk to McLachlin CJC suggested a distinct approach never comprehensively articulated, but intuitively well-known and widely-emulated among those in her sphere of influence. Drawing on the Chief Justice’s public lectures—where she often explained and offered deeper reflection on the McLachlin Court’s defining jurisprudence—I make the case in this article that at the heart of that approach is a quality best described as the pursuit …

Spousal Support In Quebec: Resisting The Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines, Jodi Lazare

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Since 2005, the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines have become an essential part of the practice of family law throughout Canada. Aimed at structuring discretionary spousal support determinations under the Divorce Act and increasing the fairness of awards, the Advisory Guidelines have been embraced by appellate courts across jurisdictions. Quebec is the exception to that trend. Despite that marriage and divorce fall under federal jurisdiction, Quebec courts resist the application of these non-binding rules, written by two family law scholars. This article responds to Quebec's resistance to the Advisory Guidelines and suggests that concerns about them may be misplaced. By reviewing …

Extradition And Trial Delays: Recent Developments (And Lessons?) From Canada, Laura Ellyson

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Extradition – the formal rendition of criminal fugitives between states – is well-known to be a time-consuming process that often has impacts, minor or major, on the ability of states to complete prosecution in a timely manner. Thus, the extradition process can sometimes be at odds with the right to trial within a reasonable time, which is part of the overall package of fair trial rights enshrined in international human rights law. In Canada, this right is implemented by paragraph 11(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In recent years Canadian courts have developed a series of principles …

A Critique Of Canadian Jurisprudence On The Therapeutic Privilege Exception To Informed Consent, Michael Hadskis

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The Supreme Court of Canada’s landmark decisions in Hopp v Lepp and Reibl v Hughes furnished a general analytical framework for informed consent actions that remains fully intact today. This article sets its gaze on a specific aspect of the framework, dubbed “therapeutic privilege,” that permits physicians to deviate from their general duty to disclose material, treatment-related risks to competent patients. Specifically, the privilege allows information about material risks to be withheld or generalized if physicians believe their patients are “unable to cope” with receiving such information. It is argued that the Supreme Court’s terse and vaguely-articulated exception to truth …

Courts In Federal Countries: Federalists Or Unitarists?, Hannah Steeves

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

This book is the product of a comparative research project completed by the Forum of Federations and supported by the Government of Quebec. The Forum of Federations has the goal of linking academic research to real world practices and is supported and funded by international partners. Courts in Federal Countries: Federalists or Unitarists? contributes directly to this goal by providing a well-rounded, highly informed, comparative approach to the topic of the structural issues of federalism. This text is the first of a larger, forthcoming, seven volume series on federalism to be developed by the Forum of Federations.

More Than 'Revenge Porn' Civil Remedies For The Nonconsensual Distribution Of Intimate Images, Suzie Dunn, Alessia Petricone-Westwood

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The non-consensual distribution of intimate images, or “revenge porn” as it is colloquially known, is a growing phenomenon in the digital era that has devastated the lives of countless individuals. Targets of this conduct have suffered both short and long-lasting harms that have had serious repercussions on their mental health, physical well-being, and safety. Once their intimate images have been shared without their consent, they can face damage to their personal and professional reputations. There are reported cases where individuals have lost their jobs, have had to relocate, were stalked and harassed, experienced some form of emotional trauma, and had …

Informal Justice: An Examination Of Why Ontarians Do Not Seek Legal Advice, Matthew Dylag

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Modern access to justice scholarship takes as its premise that the focus of legal reform must be on the legal problems experienced in the day-to-day lives of the public; not just those problems that are brought before the formal court system for adjudication. In 2014, the Canadian Forum on Civil Justice [CFCJ] completed a comprehensive survey for the Cost of Justice Project inquiring into the civil legal needs among ordinary Canadians. One of the many conclusions that can be drawn from the survey data is the finding that most Ontarians do not go to lawyers in order to resolve their …

Will Delaware Be Different? An Empirical Study Of Tc Heartland And The Shift To Defendant Choice Of Venue, Ofer Eldar, Neel U. Sukhatme

Faculty Scholarship

Why do some venues evolve into litigation havens while others do not? Venues might compete for litigation for various reasons, such as enhancing their judges’ prestige and increasing revenues for the local bar. This competition is framed by the party that chooses the venue. Whether plaintiffs or defendants primarily choose venue is crucial because, we argue, the two scenarios are not symmetrical.

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods illustrates this dynamic. There, the Court effectively shifted venue choice in many patent infringement cases from plaintiffs to corporate defendants. We use TC Heartland to empirically measure …

Curing The Federal Court Vacancy Crisis, Carl Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

The federal judiciary has experienced a vacancy crisis, which has intensified over President Donald Trump's tenure when judicial openings significantly increased from the 105 vacancies at his inauguration. Despite these concerns, analysts hail court selection as Trump's paramount success. This Article canvasses the rise and expansion of the crisis and scrutinizes the practices which Trump and the I 15th Senate instituted, as Republican concentration on quickly appointing many conservative appeals court judges resulted in departures from longstanding precedents and undermined the presidential discharge of constitutional responsibilities to nominate and confirm impressive jurists as well as senatorial duties to advise and …

Amicus Curiae Professor Marin K. Levy’S Amicus Brief In Support Of Plaintiff-Appellant Governor Roy A. Cooper, Iii, Marin K. Levy

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Benefits And Costs Of Civil Justice Reform, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

For more than a century, excessive costs and delays have been a chronic complaint about the American civil justice system. Although some states took steps to improve civil case processing in the past, most of those efforts had only a negligible effect, if any, and few were able to sustain those effects over time. Recently, however, a number of states have implemented civil justice reforms that couple changes in pro­cedural rules with improved civil case automation and staffing models that offer new hope for significant improvements in civil case processing. This paper focuses on four reforms implemented in the Eleventh …

Family Justice Initiative: The Landscape Of Domestic Relations Cases In State Courts, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Lydia Hamblin, Brittney Via, Natalie Anne Knowlton

Faculty Publications

The Family Justice Initiative (FJI) Landscape study represents the first large, aggregate examination of how family court cases are litigated in the state courts. Much of the findings confirmed conventional wisdom about family court litigation, though several offered new insights into the typical domestic relations case. The study findings also raise questions both of how domestic relations cases should be managed and whether the judicial branch is still the most appropriate forum for such cases.

This report documents the caseload characteristics of domestic relations cases disposed between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017, across eleven large, urban courts. Three …

Changing Times, Changing Relationships For The Bench And Civil Bar, Paula Hannaford-Agor

Faculty Publications

For the past century, the interests of the bench and bar in delivering justice to civil litigants were closely aligned. As civil litigants’ needs change, courts recognize they must lead the way on civil justice reforms both for their own sake and to encourage productive change in civil legal practice.

The Story Of The Dubai International Financial Centre Courts: A Retrospective, Jayanth K. Krishnan

Books & Book Chapters by Maurer Faculty

Can Western-based, English-speaking, common law commercial courts operate successfully in an environment that are not their own—such as in the Middle East? This question is not a simple thought experiment but rather the reality that has occurred since the mid-2000s in the Emirate of Dubai. This monograph recounts the history of how the ‘Dubai International Financial Centre Courts’ emerged. Drawing on extensive interviews with key stakeholders involved in the process, along with rich original documents as well as all of the Courts’ judgments, this narrative offers important lessons for those seeking to understand more fully the complex interplay of how …

Politics, Power Dynamics, And The Limits Of Existing Self-Regulation And Oversight In Icc Preliminary Examinations, Asaf Lubin

Books & Book Chapters by Maurer Faculty

Professor Lubin's contribution to volume 2 is titled, "Politics, Power Dynamics, and the Limits of Existing Self-Regulation and Oversight in ICC Preliminary Examinations," pp. 77-150.

Should the normative framework that governs the International Criminal Court’s (‘ICC’) oversight concerning preliminary examinations undergo a reform? The following chapter answers this question in the affirmative, making the claim that both self-regulation by the Office of the Prosecutor (‘OTP’) and quality control by the Pre-Trial Chamber (‘PTC’) currently suffer from significant deficiencies, thus failing to reach the optimum point on the scale between absolute prosecutorial discretion and absolute control. The chapter demonstrates some of …

Dethroning The Hierarchy Of Authority, Amy J. Griffin

Publications

The use of authority in legal argument is constantly evolving—both the types of information deemed authoritative and their degree of authoritativeness—and that evolution has accelerated in recent years with dramatic changes in access to legal information. In contrast, the uncontroversial and ubiquitous “hierarchy of authority” used as the cornerstone for all legal analysis has remained entirely fixed. This article argues that the use of the traditional hierarchy as the dominant model for legal authority is deeply flawed, impeding a deeper understanding of the use of authority in legal argument. Lawyers, judges, and academics all know this, and yet no scholarly …

Heretical Archives: Heterotopic Institutions And Fictive Records, Peter Goodrich

Articles

No abstract provided.

The Disruptive Neuroscience Of Judicial Choice, Anna Spain Bradley

Publications

Scholars of judicial behavior overwhelmingly substantiate the historical presumption that most judges act impartially and independent most of the time. The reality of human behavior, however, says otherwise. Drawing upon untapped evidence from neuroscience, this Article provides a comprehensive evaluation of how bias, emotion, and empathy—all central to human decision-making—are inevitable in judicial choice. The Article offers three novel neuroscientific insights that explain why this inevitability is so. First, because human cognition associated with decision-making involves multiple, and often intersecting, neural regions and circuits, logic and reason are not separate from bias and emotion in the brain. Second, bias, emotion, …

Celebrating Mundane Conflict, Deborah J. Cantrell

Publications

This Article interrogates the dominant conception of conflict and challenges the narrative of conflict as hard, difficult and painful to engage. The Article reveals two primary framing errors that cause one to misperceive how ubiquitous and ordinary is conflict. The first error is to misperceive conflict as categorical — something either is a conflict or it is not. People make that error as a way of trying to avoid conflict. People falsely hope that there might be a category of “not conflict,” like disagreements, that will be easier to navigate. The second error is to misperceive the world and individuals …

A Single Symbolic Dollar: How Nominal Damages Can Keep Lawsuits Alive, Megan E. Cambre

Georgia Law Review

The Eleventh Circuit's August 2017 opinion in
Flanigan's Enterprises v. City of Sandy Springs
deepened a circuit split regarding the role of
nominal damages in the justiciabilityanalysis. The
critical question is whether, in cases involving
constitutional violations, a claim for nominal
damages alone suffices to confer standing or to
defeat mootness when other forms of relief are
unavailable or moot. The Second, Fifth, and Ninth
Circuits have all held that nominal damages alone
are enough, but not without contention from
dissenting judges. The First, Third, Fourth,
Seventh, Eighth, and D.C. Circuitshave considered
the question-but have not conclusively decided its
answer. …

Comparative Approaches To Constitutional History, Jamal Greene, Yvonne Tew

Faculty Scholarship

An historical approach to constitutional interpretation draws upon original intentions or understandings of the meaning or application of a constitutional provision. Comparing the ways in which courts in different jurisdictions use history is a complex exercise. In recent years, academic and judicial discussion of “originalism” has obscured both the global prevalence of resorting to historical materials as an interpretive resource and the impressive diversity of approaches courts may take to deploying those materials. This chapter seeks, in Section B, to develop a basic taxonomy of historical approaches. Section C explores in greater depth the practices of eight jurisdictions with constitutional …

What Does It Mean To Be ‘Pro-Arbitration’?, George A. Bermann

Faculty Scholarship

International arbitration commentators commonly ask of a proposed policy or practice whether it is ‘pro-’ or ‘anti-arbitration’. Framing the question that way presupposes a shared understanding of what does or does not make a policy or practice arbitration-friendly. In truth, the ways in which policies or practices may affect international arbitration’s well-being are manifold. They may even distinctly serve international arbitration’s well-being in some respects while equally distinctly disserving it in others. It behooves those who take international; arbitration’s well-being seriously to acknowledge the multiplicity of metrics for identifying what is ‘pro-’ and what is ‘anti-arbitration’ and to seek the …