Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Seattle University School of Law (191)
- University of Michigan Law School (83)
- Pepperdine University (27)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (24)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (23)
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (22)
- UIC School of Law (21)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (18)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (18)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (17)
- Pace University (16)
- University of Richmond (16)
- West Virginia University (15)
- William & Mary Law School (15)
- Duke Law (12)
- University of Georgia School of Law (12)
- Cornell University Law School (11)
- Brigham Young University Law School (9)
- Brooklyn Law School (9)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (9)
- University of Colorado Law School (8)
- Fordham Law School (7)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (7)
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (7)
- Cleveland State University (6)
- New York Law School (6)
- University of Montana (6)
- American University Washington College of Law (5)
- Florida A&M University College of Law (5)
- Roger Williams University (5)
- Keyword
-
- Jurisdiction (111)
- Civil procedure (65)
- Personal jurisdiction (36)
- Civil Procedure (29)
- Federal courts (29)
-
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (27)
- Diversity jurisdiction (26)
- Supreme Court (20)
- Law (19)
- Federal Courts (17)
- Litigation (17)
- Constitutional law (16)
- Due process (15)
- Supplemental Jurisdiction (15)
- Supreme court (15)
- Venue (15)
- 28 U.S.C sec. 1367 (14)
- Federal Supplemental-Jurisdiction Statute (14)
- Federalism (14)
- Diversity (13)
- Federal jurisdiction (13)
- Reappraisal (13)
- Removal (13)
- Subject matter jurisdiction (13)
- Minimum contacts (12)
- Standing (12)
- Ancillary jurisdiction (11)
- Courts (11)
- Discrimination (11)
- Pendent jurisdiction (11)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Seattle University Law Review (189)
- Michigan Law Review (76)
- Faculty Scholarship (36)
- Touro Law Review (22)
- Indiana Law Journal (19)
-
- Pepperdine Law Review (19)
- UIC Law Review (19)
- Faculty Publications (16)
- West Virginia Law Review (15)
- Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) (14)
- Northwestern University Law Review (12)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (11)
- Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications (11)
- Articles (10)
- BYU Law Review (9)
- Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law (8)
- Publications (8)
- Scholarly Works (8)
- Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1991 - ) (8)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (8)
- Faculty Articles (7)
- Fordham Law Review (7)
- Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal (7)
- Scholarly Articles (7)
- University of Richmond Law Review (7)
- Cleveland State Law Review (6)
- Faculty Works (6)
- Law Faculty Publications (6)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (5)
- Catholic University Law Review (5)
- Publication Type
Articles 571 - 600 of 750
Full-Text Articles in Jurisdiction
The Neumeier-Schultz Rules: How Logical A "Next Stage In The Evolution Of The Law" After Babcock?, Gary J. Simson
The Neumeier-Schultz Rules: How Logical A "Next Stage In The Evolution Of The Law" After Babcock?, Gary J. Simson
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Judgments From A Choice-Of-Law Perspective, Gene R. Shreve
Judgments From A Choice-Of-Law Perspective, Gene R. Shreve
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
The New Supplemental Jurisdiction Statute--Flawed But Fixable, Wendy Collins Perdue
The New Supplemental Jurisdiction Statute--Flawed But Fixable, Wendy Collins Perdue
Law Faculty Publications
A critique of the newly enacted 28 U.S.C. § 1367, which delineated the circumstances under which federal courts could rule on additional claims related to the one that is the basis of federal jurisdiction.
Codification Of Supplemental Jurisdiction: Anatomy Of A Legislative Proposal, Arthur D. Wolf
Codification Of Supplemental Jurisdiction: Anatomy Of A Legislative Proposal, Arthur D. Wolf
Faculty Scholarship
The historic nature of congressional action in codifying supplemental jurisdiction in section 1367 calls for a close examination of the legislative process and product. Section I of this Article presents a brief survey of the development of supplemental jurisdiction. Section II examines the history of the legislative process that produced section 1367. Section III contains a preliminary review of judicial decisions under the new supplemental jurisdiction statute. The Article concludes with some editorial remarks regarding the statute and the process by which it became public law.
Is 28 U.S.C. § 1404(A) A Federal Forum-Shopping Statute?, Michaael B. Rodden
Is 28 U.S.C. § 1404(A) A Federal Forum-Shopping Statute?, Michaael B. Rodden
Washington Law Review
In 1948, Congress enacted section 1404(a) of Tit;e 28 to allow transfers between federal district courts. Congress intended the statute to promote convenience in the federal courts. The statute does not specify which state's law applies following a transfer, but in 1964, in Van Dusen v. Barrack, the Supreme Court determined that the state law of the transferor court must apply following defendant-initiated transfers. The Van Dusen Court reasoned that application of the statute should promote convenience and uniformity and discourage forum-shopping in the federal courts. In 1990, in Ferens v. John Deere Co., the Supreme Court held that the …
Plotting The Next "Revolution" In Choice Of Law: A Proposed Approach, Gary J. Simson
Plotting The Next "Revolution" In Choice Of Law: A Proposed Approach, Gary J. Simson
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Compounding Confusion And Hampering Diversity: Life After Finley And The Supplemental Jurisdiction Statute, Richard D. Freer
Compounding Confusion And Hampering Diversity: Life After Finley And The Supplemental Jurisdiction Statute, Richard D. Freer
Faculty Articles
It has been a tough couple of years for supplemental jurisdiction. In recent decades, the doctrine, which earlier had been called the "child of necessity and sire of confusion," had become somewhat less confusing. The Supreme Court created a flurry of concern over the future of the doctrine with a pair of restrictive decisions in the late 1970s, but showed no further interest; the lower courts generally interpreted those holdings narrowly. With exceptions in a couple of areas, the application of supplemental jurisdiction in the various joinder situations became relatively clear and predictable, and the doctrine played a major role …
Grasping At Burnt Straws: The Disaster Of The Supplemental Jurisdiction Statute, Thomas C. Arthur, Richard Freer
Grasping At Burnt Straws: The Disaster Of The Supplemental Jurisdiction Statute, Thomas C. Arthur, Richard Freer
Faculty Articles
Ah, the strawman model! Where would Professors Rowe, Burbank, and Mengler be without it? At a minimum, they would have a much shorter article. If Professor Freer in fact torched the entire farm, it is because there was so much dry straw lying around after the three drafters finished tilting with the strawmen they created in their response to Professor Freer's article. The drafters spend more than half of their article arguing the irrelevant points that a statute was needed after Finley, that the statute was consistent with recommendations of the Federal Courts Study Committee, and that Professor Freer …
Close Enough For Government Work: What Happens When Congress Doesn't Do Its Job, Thomas C. Arthur, Richard Freer
Close Enough For Government Work: What Happens When Congress Doesn't Do Its Job, Thomas C. Arthur, Richard Freer
Faculty Articles
There's the beef. The supplemental jurisdiction statute, particularly section 1367(b), is a nightmare of draftsmanship. The problems that flow from that fact are more than aesthetic. The sloppiness makes easy cases hard and sows confusion in areas where there should be, and so easily could have been, clarity. It creates that most wasteful type of litigation - fights over jurisdiction. Subject matter jurisdiction rules ought to be clear and capable of near-mechanical application whenever possible. Such precision was possible in the supplemental jurisdiction, if only someone had spent as much time writing the statute as the trio has spent writing …
Pragmatism Without Politics -- A Half Measure Of Authority For Jurisdictional Common Law, Gene R. Shreve
Pragmatism Without Politics -- A Half Measure Of Authority For Jurisdictional Common Law, Gene R. Shreve
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
Survey Of Civil Jurisdiction In Indian Country 1990, Sandra Hansen Esq.
Survey Of Civil Jurisdiction In Indian Country 1990, Sandra Hansen Esq.
American Indian Law Review
No abstract provided.
Personal Jurisdiction And The Beetle In The Box, Wendy Collins Perdue
Personal Jurisdiction And The Beetle In The Box, Wendy Collins Perdue
Law Faculty Publications
In 1980 in World-Wide Volkswagen v. Woodson, the Supreme Court described personal jurisdiction as "an instrument of interstate federalism." Two years later in Insurance Corporation of Ireland v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee, the Court back-pedaled and explained that personal jurisdiction "represents a restriction on judicial power not as a matter of sovereignty, but as a matter of individual liberty." Then, in 1985 in Phillips Petroleum v. Shutts, the Court explained that the purpose of personal jurisdiction is "to protect a defendant from the travail of defending in a distant forum." Three years later in Van Cauwenberghe v. Biard, …
G. Heilman Brewing Co., Inc. V. Joseph Oat Corp.: The Seventh Circuit Approves The Exercise Of Inherent Authority To Increase A District Judge's Pre-Trial Authority Under Rule 16, 23 J. Marshall L. Rev. 517 (1990), Bradley Adas
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Finley V. United States: Unstringing Pendent Jurisdiction, Wendy Collins Perdue
Finley V. United States: Unstringing Pendent Jurisdiction, Wendy Collins Perdue
Law Faculty Publications
The approach adopted by the Supreme Court in Finley v. United States calls into question not only pendent-claim jurisdiction but ancillary jurisdiction as well. Particularly vulnerable to attack are those uses of ancillary jurisdiction that involve the addition of new parties such as class action, intervention, and impleader. Furthermore, the opinion may lay a foundation for attacking ancillary-claim jurisdiction involving counterclaims or cross-claims. This commentary will examine Finley and the potential impact of the opinion on the various permutations of ancillary and pendent jurisdiction.
A New Litany Of Personal Jurisdiction, Margaret G. Stewart
A New Litany Of Personal Jurisdiction, Margaret G. Stewart
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
History Comes Calling: Dean Griswold Offers New Evidence About The Jurisdictional Debate Surrounding The Enactment Of The Declaratory Judgment Act, Donald L. Doernberg, Michael B. Mushlin
History Comes Calling: Dean Griswold Offers New Evidence About The Jurisdictional Debate Surrounding The Enactment Of The Declaratory Judgment Act, Donald L. Doernberg, Michael B. Mushlin
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
In a recent article, we proposed that the Declaratory Judgment Act of 1934 was intended, contrary to the Supreme Court's long-standing interpretation, to enlarge the subject matter jurisdiction of the federal courts. When Congress considered the Act, jurisdictional concerns centered around whether declaratory judgments would violate the case-or-controversy clause, not whether introduction of the device would expand the federal question jurisdiction Congress already had authorized. There is, indeed, substantial evidence that Congress intended to expand federal question jurisdiction to include at least two, and possibly three, case models; there is virtually no evidence supporting the contrary position taken by the …
Suing A State In Federal Court Under A Private Cause Of Action: An Eleventh Amendment Primer, Donald L. Boren
Suing A State In Federal Court Under A Private Cause Of Action: An Eleventh Amendment Primer, Donald L. Boren
Cleveland State Law Review
A major obstacle facing an attorney, whose client is suing a state in federal court under a right created by a federal law, is the restraints placed on the federal court's jurisdiction by the eleventh amendment to the United States Constitution. The purpose of this article is to provide assistance through this wonderland of eleventh amendment jurisprudence. This article examines three major eleventh amendment issues, plus-and perhaps more importantly-methods of avoiding eleventh amendment litigation. Section I of the article examines the historical evidence on whether the amendment was intended to apply to cases in which a citizen of a state …
The Trojan Horse: How The Declaratory Judgment Act Created A Cause Of Action And Expanded Federal Jurisdiction While The Supreme Court Wasn't Looking, Donald L. Doernberg, Michael B. Mushlin
The Trojan Horse: How The Declaratory Judgment Act Created A Cause Of Action And Expanded Federal Jurisdiction While The Supreme Court Wasn't Looking, Donald L. Doernberg, Michael B. Mushlin
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This Article examines the Court's treatment of declaratory judgment actions. It demonstrates that the Court's ‘procedural only’ view of the Act frustrates congressional intent and is neither analytically sound nor practical. Part I discusses the general rules governing federal question jurisdiction and the Court's method for dealing with declaratory judgment cases. Part II explores the history and purpose of the Declaratory Judgment Act and its relationship to federal question jurisdiction. This study demonstrates that the Supreme Court's assumptions about the jurisdictional import of the Declaratory Judgment Act find no support in the legislative history. Further, it shows that the Court's …
Transnational Discovery In The Extraterritorial Application Of U.S. Antitrust Laws, Maria Eugenia Gimenez
Transnational Discovery In The Extraterritorial Application Of U.S. Antitrust Laws, Maria Eugenia Gimenez
LLM Theses and Essays
After World War II, there was a push for economic integration to promote growth and prevent conflict. Multinational corporations became key players, but their mobility and links to different countries created legal challenges, with nations seeking to assert their laws and policies over foreign entities. U.S. courts’ efforts to compel compliance with antitrust laws abroad can lead to conflicts with foreign jurisdictions, especially concerning the disclosure of evidence held by foreign entities. The “effects doctrine” allows U.S. antitrust laws to be applied to foreign conduct if they have intended economic effects in the U.S. Subsequent cases refined this doctrine, considering …
3rd Annual Federal Practice Institute, Office Of Continuing Legal Education At The University Of Kentucky College Of Law, John R. Leathers, Willam M. Lear, Edward H. Johnstone, Eugene E. Siler, Frank E. Haddad, Laramie L. Leatherman, Melissa Forsythe, Gregory L. Monge, Leonard Green, Thomas D. Lambros, Stanley M. Chesley, Charles S. Cassis
3rd Annual Federal Practice Institute, Office Of Continuing Legal Education At The University Of Kentucky College Of Law, John R. Leathers, Willam M. Lear, Edward H. Johnstone, Eugene E. Siler, Frank E. Haddad, Laramie L. Leatherman, Melissa Forsythe, Gregory L. Monge, Leonard Green, Thomas D. Lambros, Stanley M. Chesley, Charles S. Cassis
Continuing Legal Education Materials
Outline of speakers' presentations from the 3rd Annual Federal Practice Institute held by UK/CLE on September 23, 1988.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction As A New Issue On Appeal: Reining In An Unruly Horse, Robert J. Martineau
Subject Matter Jurisdiction As A New Issue On Appeal: Reining In An Unruly Horse, Robert J. Martineau
BYU Law Review
No abstract provided.
In Re United States Catholic Conference: Considering Non-Party Rights, David P. Brooks
In Re United States Catholic Conference: Considering Non-Party Rights, David P. Brooks
BYU Law Review
No abstract provided.
Surrogate Parenting After Baby M: The Ball Moves To The Legislature’S Court, John R. Dunne, Gregory V. Serio
Surrogate Parenting After Baby M: The Ball Moves To The Legislature’S Court, John R. Dunne, Gregory V. Serio
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Report On Survey Of The Bar, Committee On Federal Courts Of The New York State Bar Association
Report On Survey Of The Bar, Committee On Federal Courts Of The New York State Bar Association
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Procedural And Substantive Problems In Complex Litigation Arising From Disasters, Jack B. Weinstein
Procedural And Substantive Problems In Complex Litigation Arising From Disasters, Jack B. Weinstein
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Adjudicatory Jurisdiction And Class Actions, Diane P. Wood
Adjudicatory Jurisdiction And Class Actions, Diane P. Wood
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Personal Jurisdiction And The Stream Of Commerce, A. Kimberley Dayton
Personal Jurisdiction And The Stream Of Commerce, A. Kimberley Dayton
Faculty Scholarship
This article evaluates the stream of commerce theory of personaljurisdiction in light of existing precedent and the constitutionalimperative of due process. Part II briefly describes the factualbackground of Asahi and the various opinions rendered in the case.Part m outlines the development of jurisdictional doctrine since International Shoe, emphasizing the meaning of "purposeful availment" and its fluid role in the due process equation governing statecourt jurisdiction. Part IV then traces the evolution of the stream of commerce theory since International Shoe. Part V examines and rejects criticisms of the stream of commerce theory, and concludes that under any reasonabre interpretation of …
There's No Reason For It; It's Just Our Policy: The Well-Pleaded Complaint Rule Sabotages The Purposes Of Federal Question Jurisdiction, Donald L. Doernberg
There's No Reason For It; It's Just Our Policy: The Well-Pleaded Complaint Rule Sabotages The Purposes Of Federal Question Jurisdiction, Donald L. Doernberg
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This Article is presented in three parts. Section I traces the statutory and case development of federal question jurisdiction, both under the constitutional and statutory “arising under”' language. Section II demonstrates the problems that the Mottley rule has caused in building a rational system of federal question jurisdiction, particularly in cases seeking declaratory judgments. Section III contends that the Mottley rule is irrational because it is a mechanical rule that ignores important policy considerations underlying the existence of federal question jurisdiction. Section III goes on to suggest that federal question jurisdiction should depend upon the centrality of the federal issue …
Sin, Scandal And Substantive Due Process: Personal Jurisdiction And Pennoyer Reconsidered, Wendy Collins Perdue
Sin, Scandal And Substantive Due Process: Personal Jurisdiction And Pennoyer Reconsidered, Wendy Collins Perdue
Law Faculty Publications
Professor Perdue recounts the underlying story of the U.S. Supreme Court's seminal personal jurisdiction case, Pennoyer v. Neff.
Burger King Corporation V. Rudzewicz: The Minimum Contacts Test Meets The Modern-Day Franchise Agreement, 20 J. Marshall L. Rev. 169 (1986), Valerie Ann Hall
Burger King Corporation V. Rudzewicz: The Minimum Contacts Test Meets The Modern-Day Franchise Agreement, 20 J. Marshall L. Rev. 169 (1986), Valerie Ann Hall
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.