Legal Remedies Commons^™

Punishment But Not A Penalty? Punitive Damages Are Impermissible Under Foreign Substantive Law, Paul A. Hoversten

Michigan Law Review

It is a well-established principle that no court applies the penal laws of another sovereign. But what exactly is a penal law? According to Judge Cardozo, a penal law effects “vindication of the public justice” rather than “reparation to one aggrieved.” Although courts have historically treated punitive damages as a purely civil remedy, that attitude has shifted over time. Modern American punitive damages serve not to compensate the plaintiff but to punish the defendant on behalf of the whole community. Therefore, when courts rely on foreign substantive law to impose punitive damages, they arguably violate the well-established principle that no …

Too Many Cooks In The Climate Change Kitchen: The Case For An Administrative Remedy For Damages Caused By Increased Greenhouse Gas Concentrations, Benjamin Reese

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

Recent federal and state court decisions have made clear that federal common law claims against emitters of greenhouse gases are not sustainable; however, those same courts seem to have given state common law tort claims the green light, at least if the claims are brought in the state where the polluters are located. This Note contends that such suits are not an adequate remedy for those injured by climate change because they will face nearly insurmountable barriers in state court, and because there are major policy-level drawbacks to relying on state tort law rather than a federal solution. This Note …

Trial And Settlement: A Study Of High-Low Agreements, J. J. Prescott, Kathryn E. Spier, Albert Yoon

Articles

This article presents the first systematic theoretical and empirical study of highlow agreements in civil litigation. A high-low agreement is a private contract that, if signed by litigants before trial, constrains any plaintiff’s recovery to a specified range. In our theoretical model, trial is both costly and risky. When litigants have divergent subjective beliefs and are mutually optimistic about their trial prospects, cases may fail to settle. In these cases, high-low agreements can be in litigants’ mutual interest because they limit the risk of outlier awards while still allowing mutually beneficial speculation. Using claims data from a national insurance company, …

The Future Of Classwide Punitive Damages, Catherine M. Sharkey

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Conventional wisdom holds that the punitive damages class action is susceptiblenot only to doctrinal restraints imposed on class actions but also to constitutionaldue process limitations placed on punitive damages. Thus, it would seem that theprospects for punitive damages classes are even grimmer than for class actionsgenerally.This conventional picture misunderstands the role of punitive damages and, inparticular, the relationship between class actions and punitive damages. It eitherignores or underestimates the distinctly societal element of punitive damages, whichmakes them especially conducive to aggregate treatment. Furthermore, punitivedamages classes offer a solution to the constitutional due process problem of juriesawarding "classwide" damages in a …

Standing's Expected Value, Jonathan Remy Nash

Michigan Law Review

This Article argues in favor of standing based on expected value of harm. Standing doctrine has been constructed in a way that is oblivious to the idea of expected value. If people have suffered a loss with a positive expected value, they have suffered an "injury in fact." The incorporation of expected value into standing doctrine casts doubt on many of the Supreme Court's decisions in which it denies standing because the relevant injury is too "speculative" or is not "likely" to be redressed by a decree in the plaintiff's favor. This Article addresses this shortcoming in standing jurisprudence by …

The Federal Common Law Of Vicarious Fiduciary Liability Under Erisa, Colleen E. Medill

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), the federal law that regulates employer-sponsored benefit plans, has a rich history of judiciallycreated federal common law. This Article explores the theoretical, policy, statutory, and stare decisis grounds for the development of another area offederal common law under ERISA-the incorporation of respondeat superior liability principles to impose ERISA fiduciary liability ("vicarious fiduciary liability") upon a corporation for the fiduciary activities of its employees or agents. The Article proposes that the federal courts should adopt a federal common law rule of vicarious fiduciary liability under ERISA based on the traditional scope of …

Respondent Superior As An Affirmative Defense: How Employers Immunize Themselves From Direct Negligence Claims, J. J. Burns

Michigan Law Review

Most courts hold that where a defendant employer admits that it is vicariously liable for its employee's negligence, a plaintiff's additional claims of negligent entrustment, hiring, retention, supervision, and training must be dismissed. Generally, courts apply this rule based on the logic that allowing a plaintiff's additional claims adds no potential liability beyond that which has already been admitted. Furthermore, since the additional claims merely allege a redundant theory of recovery once a respondeat superior admission has been made, the prejudicial evidence of an employee's prior bad acts which often accompanies direct negligence claims against employers can be excluded without …

Presumed Guilty Until Proven Innocent: The Burden Of Proof In Wrongful Conviction Claims Under State Compensation Statutes, Daniel S. Kahn

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Despite significant efforts to uncover and prevent wrongful convictions, little attention has been paid to the compensation of wrongfully convicted individuals once they are released from prison. State compensation statutes offer the best path to redress because they do not require the claimant to prove that the state was at fault for the wrongful conviction and because they are not susceptible to the same political influences as other methods of compensation. However, even under compensation statutes, too many meritorious claims are dismissed, settled for far too little, or never brought in the first place. After examining the current statutory framework, …

Against Secret Regulation: Why And How We Should End The Practical Obscurity Of Injunctions And Consent Decrees (Symposium: Rising Stars: A New Generation Of Scholars Looks At Civil Justice), Margo Schlanger

Articles

Every year, federal and state courts put in place orders that regulate the prospective operations of certainly hundreds and probably thousands of large government and private enterprises. Injunctions and injunction-like settlement agreements-whether styled consent decrees, settlements, conditional dismissals, or some other more creative title-bind the activities of employers, polluters, competitors, lenders, creditors, property holders, schools, housing authorities, police departments, jails, prisons, nursing homes, and many others. The types of law underlying these cases multiply just as readily: consumer lending, environmental, employment, anti-discrimination, education, constitutional, and so on. Injunctive orders, whether reached by litigation or on consent, suffuse the regulatory environment, …

The Foggy Road For Evaluating Punitive Damages: Lifting The Haze From The Bmw/State Farm Guideposts, Steven L. Chanenson, John Y. Gotanda

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In this Article, Professors Chanenson and Gotanda propose that courts treat comparable maximum criminal or civil legislative fines as a presumptive due process limit on punitive damage awards. The Article reviews the manner in which courts have implemented the three-guidepost framework for constitutional review of punitive awards laid out by the Supreme Court in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore and in State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell. Finding that courts have struggled to articulate a coherent rationale and methodology for review of such awards, the authors propose a greater reliance on the third guidepost of …

The Unwelcome Judicial Obligation To Respect Politics In Racial Gerrymandering Remedies, Jeffrey L. Fisher

Michigan Law Review

Like it or not, the attack on "bizarrely" shaped majority-minority electoral districts is now firmly underway. Nearly four years have passed since the Supreme Court first announced in Shaw v. Reno that a state's redistricting plan that is "so extremely irregular on its face that it rationally can be viewed only as an effort to segregate the races for purposes of voting" may violate the Equal Protection Clause. Such a district, the Court held, reinforces racial stereotypes, carries us further from the goal of a political system in which race no longer matters, and "threatens to undermine our system of …

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 …

Why Civil Cases Go To Trial: Strategic Bargaining And The Desire For Vindication, Samuel R. Gross, Kent D. Syverud

Articles

When negotiations break down and a dispute cannot be settled, attorneys commonly blame their adversaries, often questioning their ethics or their judgment. After interviewing many attorneys, we have come to believe much of the criticism is directed at strategic moves in negotiation. But strategic ploys are not the only reason dispute resolution fails. Rather, our research also suggest that a genuine desire for vindication through trial or other formal process may be very significant in some types of cases where bargaining breaks down.

Victim Reparations In The Inter-American Human Rights System: A Critical Assessment Of Current Practice And Procedure, Jo M. Pasqualucci

Michigan Journal of International Law

Part II of this article analyzes the statutory authority for reparations in the Inter-American system in light of the legislative history of the American Convention's reparations provision and compares that authority with that provided for in the European human rights system. Part III sets forth the Inter-American Court's procedures for determining reparations once State responsibility has been established. Part IV evaluates the parties who may receive reparations. Part V analyzes the types of reparations provided generally under international law and specifically in the Inter-American system. Part VI criticizes the Court's determination to grant only a small share of the reparations …

Don't Try: Civil Jury Verdicts In A System Geared To Settlement, 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 …

A Human Rights Exception To Sovereign Immunity: Some Thoughts On Princz V. Federal Republic Of Germany, Mathias Reimann

Michigan Journal of International Law

Though narrow in scope, this article is emphatic in its message. It is time to deny immunity to foreign sovereigns for torture, genocide, or enslavement, at least when they are sued by Americans in American courts. Such a denial would be consonant with two developments that have marked international law since World War II: the restriction of sovereign immunity and the expansion of human rights protection.

Sovereign Immunity And Violations Of International Jus Cogens - Some Critical Remarks, Andreas Zimmermann

Michigan Journal of International Law

The scope of this article, like the one to which it responds, is limited. It does not purport to resolve any question relating to the municipal law of the United States, such as the interpretation of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Instead, it considers the problem from a purely international law perspective. Furthermore, it does not indulge in a complete description of attempts made by the Federal Republic of Germany to pay compensation - as far as feasible - for all the blatant human rights violations committed by Nazi Germany in the period 1933-1945.

A Bitter Inheritance: East German Real Property And The Supreme Constitutional Court's "Land Reform" Decision Of April 23, 1991, Jonathan J. Doyle

Michigan Journal of International Law

This article briefly examines the principal expropriatory measures undertaken between 1945 and 1989, the agreements between the two German governments relating thereto, and the divisive constitutional issues raised by this fusion of two antithetical legal systems in the area of property law. The text concludes with an analysis of the German Supreme Court's "Land Reform" decision and the juridical controversy surrounding it.

Divided We Fall: Associational Standing And Collective Interest, Heidi Li Feldman

Michigan Law Review

This Note asserts that associations merit standing when they seek to litigate collective interests they reasonably claim as theirs. Part I of this Note examines the state of judicial doctrine on associational standing, and illustrates how current doctrine hampers associations by refusing to recognize, and thus protect, interests that fit naturally with those the Supreme Court has regarded as associational. Part II reworks the concept of associational standing by formalizing collective interest and arguing for the association as the appropriate legal representative of such interest. Finally, Part III addresses the separation of powers concerns raised by a reworked concept of …

Clarifying A "Pattern" Of Confusion: A Multi-Factor Approach To Civil Rico's Pattern Requirement, Ethan M. Posner

Michigan Law Review

In an attempt to provide some needed definitional clarity and redirect civil RICO toward its intended focus, this Note argues that the federal judiciary should interpret the pattern requirement narrowly, focusing on four basic factors that best demonstrate a prolonged, continuing example of criminal activity. By emphasizing (1) the presence of multiple victims, (2) the duration of the RICO defendant's criminal activity, (3) the number of illicit commercial transactions, and (4) the existence of independent criminal decisions, courts could consistently limit civil RICO to the most pernicious offenders. Part I of this Note will examine judicial interpretations of RICO and …

The Decline Of The Contract Market Damage Model, James J. White

Articles

In law school every American lawyer learns that the conventional measure of damages for breach of a sales contract is the difference between the contract price and the market price. Even before these rules were embodied in the Uniform Sales Act and the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), they were a staple of Anglo-American common law. They remain the rules with which a court would determine damage liability not only for the sale of goods, but also for the sale of real estate and securities.

The Constitutionality Of Punitive Damages Under The Excessive Fines Clause Of The Eighth Amendment, Andrew M. Kenefick

Michigan Law Review

This Note explores whether courts should look beyond the broad language in Ingraham v. Wright and scrutinize punitive damages under the excessive fines clause. Part I sets out the intuitive argument that punitive damages are analogous to criminal fines. Part II analyzes the Supreme Court's decision in Ingraham v. Wright and also reviews the few federal and state court decisions that have dealt with the excessive fines clause in civil cases, most of which have concluded that the clause has no application in a civil setting. This Part asserts that courts cannot rely solely on the Ingraham decision but must …

Reckless Endangerment Of An Employee: A Proposal In The Wake Of Film Recovery Systems To Make The Boss Responsible For His Crimes, Anne D. Samuels

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note argues that the traditional regulatory, civil, and criminal mechanisms are both ineffective and inappropriate to deter or punish corporate decisionmakers for decisions that pose risks to the safety or health of employees in the workplace. The Note proposes a new criminal offense to prevent and punish culpable corporate decisionmaking that results in employee deaths or injuries. Part I explains the novel application of the traditional murder offense in Film Recovery Systems and demonstrates that the case fails to lay the foundation for a standardized response to employee endangerment. Part II analyzes the traditional responses of the regulatory and …

Where The Money Is: Remedies To Finance Compliance With Strict Structural Injunctions, James M. Hirschhorn

Michigan Law Review

This Article examines the formal powers that are available to the federal courts to meet this situation. Part I places the problem in perspective, describing the party structure of the institutional reform decree, the :financial burdens it places on the government defendants, and the relationship of these defendants to the fiscal authorities. Part II surveys the coercive powers historically available to the federal courts sitting in equity. Part III discusses the use of these devices against government defendants who claim financial impossibility. It emphasizes the limited recognition of impossibility, the power to compel the defendants to use available resources efficiently …

Constitutional Torts, Christina B. Whitman

Articles

In this Article, I analyze the significance of the overlap between state tort law remedies and remedies under section 1983. I conclude that the dissatisfaction with section 1983 cannot fairly be attributed to the fact that it has been read to provide a remedy that "supplements" state law. I argue that most of the anxiety over constitutional damage actions under section 1983 can be understood - and resolved - only by focusing on two other questions. The first of these concerns the appropriate reach of the Constitution. Ambivalence about section 1983 reflects, in part, a fear that the federal Constitution …

Survival Of Rights Of Action After Corporate Merger, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Once a corporation ceases to exist, most courts permit neither primary nor derivative suits to be brought in its name. If a merger precipitates that corporate demise, courts usually hold that standing to sue, like other assets of the "merged" corporation, passes to the surviving corporation. This Note ponders the merit of that rule of passage.

Section I categorizes the cases defining the rule of passage. Some courts have steadfastly adhered to the rule and denied standing to the merged corporation's shareholders. Other courts, fearing that the rule would preclude meritorious actions, have created exceptions allowing these shareholders to sue …

Limitation Borrowing In Federal Courts, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note studies limitations on federal actions in light of Occidental Life. Part I discusses the reasons for limiting actions and presents a short history ·of the limitation of actions. Part II analyzes the alternatives for the federal courts when no statute of limitations applies directly. Finally, the Note suggests a solution that will achieve a result most nearly consistent with both the reasons for limiting actions and the proper role of the judiciary. It suggests, notwithstanding Occidental Life, that in some situations courts should borrow specific federal statutes of limitations and that in the remainder they should …

Reflections On Unconstitutionality In Futuro: Shavers V. Attorney General And Robinson V. Cahill, Philip H. Hecht

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This article will argue that holdings of unconstitutionality in futuro are difficult to reconcile with the separation of powers doctrine because they foster impermissible intrusions on the ability of the legislative and executive branches to act independently of the judiciary. It is further argued that in the two cases where courts have adopted the unconstitutionality in futuro approach, the failure to satisfy all of the proposed standards for the appropriateness of unconstitutionality in futuro and the further considerations of judicial legitimacy and competency should have led the courts to consider other less drastic alternatives before deciding to use unconstitutionality in …

Res Judicata/Preclusion By Judgment: The Law Applied In Federal Courts, Allan D. Vestal

Michigan Law Review

Preclusion is not a simple principle; it is a multifaceted concept affected by a number of relevant variables. A discussion of the principles is meaningful only if specific situations are discussed; to talk in generalities is not profitable. Therefore, for the sake of clarity, this Article will consider several typical situations.

Habeas Corpus - Jurisdiction - Exhaustion Of State Remedies As Prerequisite To Federal Relief, John D. Kelly S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Petitioner, a prisoner of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania convicted of armed robbery in 1947, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in federal district court after several efforts to secure the writ in a state court had been unsuccessful. Jurisdiction was based on exhaustion of available state remedies. The petition alleged that the Commonwealth had violated petitioner's rights under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by denying him the right to be represented by counsel at his trial. The Commonwealth moved to dismiss on the ground that the petition on its face showed that state remedies …