Litigation Commons^™

Evidence—Scientific Evidence: Standard Of Review Raises Questions Of Fit. General Electric Co. V. Joiner, 118 S. Ct. 512 (1997)., Russell D. Marlin

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Handling Claims For Minor And Disabled Plaintiffs: Coordinating All Aspects Of The Case, Oregon Law Institute, Elizabeth Welch, Robert P. Jones, Doug M. Fellows, Elden M. Rosenthal, Donna R. Meyer, Jack Meligan, Jane Paulson, Cynthia L. Barrett, Beth Gafur, Jude Mollgaard, Richard H. Mills, David Rollins

Oregon Law Institute, 1998

Course Materials from the April 10, 1998 Program in Portland

Do Case Outcomes Really Reveal Anything About The Legal System? Win Rates And Removal Jurisdiction, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

General Observations on Interpreting Win-Rate Data Properly. Many empirical legal studies use data on plaintiffs' rate of success, because of those data's ready availability and apparent import. Yet these "win rates" are probably the slipperiest of all judicial data. Win rates are inherently ambiguous because of the case-selection effect. The litigants' selection of the cases brought produces a biased sample from the mass of underlying disputes. The settlement process, usually conducted by rational and knowledgeable persons who take into account and thereby neutralize the very factor that one would like to study, produces a residue of litigated cases for which …

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.

Recent Case Developments, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Recent case developments in Insurance Law in years 1998 and 1999.

Recent Case Developments, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Recent case developments in Insurance law in the year 1998.

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 …

Evidence: 1996-1997 Survey Of New York Law, Faust Rossi

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Industrial Espionage As Unfair Competition, Robert L. Tucker

Akron Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Punitive Awards After Bmw, A New Capping System, And The Reported Opinion Bias, Theodore Eisenberg, Martin T. Wells

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Capping punitive damages awards is a centerpiece of the tort reform movement. According to the American Tort Reform Association, as of June 30, 1996, forty-three states allowed punitive damages awards. Of these, twenty-nine states impose no caps on punitive damages and fourteen impose some form of cap. In states that cap punitive awards, the preferred method is to employ a simple multiple of the compensatory award. Eleven states rely on a multiple of the compensatory damages award. The most popular multiple is three times the compensatory award, but this is used by only five states. The capping multiples range from …

Fraud And Federalism: Preempting Private State Securities Fraud Causes Of Action, Michael A. Perino

Faculty Publications

The passage of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 has engendered a significant forum shift in class action securities fraud litigation, from federal to state court. This unintended by-product of the Act has reignited debate over our dual federal-state system of securities regulation and in turn has inspired a discussion as to whether Congress should now preempt state securities fraud causes of action. This article argues that preemption is an appropriate, but not the only, solution to these concerns. To support this argument, this article first traces the history of dual state-federal securities regulation within the context of …

Juries: Arbiters Or Arbitrary?, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The Predictability Of Punitive Damages, Theodore Eisenberg, John Goerdt, Brian Ostrom, David Rottman, Martin T. Wells

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Using one year of jury trial outcomes from 45 of the nation's most populous counties, this article shows a strong and statistically significant correlation between compensatory and punitive damages. These findings are replicated in 25 years of punitive damages awards from Cook County, Illinois, and California. In addition, we find no evidence that punitive damages awards are more likely when individuals sue businesses than when individuals sue individuals. With respect to award frequency, juries rarely award punitive damages and appear to be especially reluctant to do so in the areas of law that have captured the most attention, products liability …

Awarding Attorney's Fees To Pro Se Litigants Under Rule 11, Jeremy D. Spector

Michigan Law Review

Among the myriad rules and statutes designed to curb litigation abuse, Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("FRCP") is "the most widely used and most controversial of the sanctions rules." The increased use of Rule ll during the last fifteen years and the recent proliferation of fee-shifting provisions in federal statutes4 have led to an onslaught of motions for attorney's fees in the federal district courts. Simultaneously, these courts are seeing an increasing number of pro se litigants appear before them. The confluence of these two trends has produced the seemingly paradoxical result of pro se parties …

The Theory Of Fee Regulation In Class Action Settlements , Bruce L. Hay

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

The Litigious Plaintiff Hypothesis: Case Selection And Resolution, Theodore Eisenberg, Henry S. Farber

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The process through which cases are selected for litigation cannot be ignored because it yields a set of lawsuits and plaintiffs that is far from a random selection either of potential claims or of potential claimants. We present a theoretical framework for understanding the operation of this suit-selection process and its relationship to the underlying distribution of potential claims and claimants. The model has implications for the trial rate and the plaintiff win rate at trial. Our empirical analysis, using data on over 200,000 federal civil litigations, yields results that are strongly consistent with the theory.

"And The Truth Shall Make You Free": Truth As A First Amendment Defense In Tortious Interference With Contract Cases, Robert L. Tucker

Akron Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Class Action Chaos? The Theory Of The Core And An Analysis Of Opt-Out Rights In Mass Tort Class Actions, Michael A. Perino

Faculty Publications

From breast implants to cigarettes, mass tort class actions are a prominent and controversial part of the contemporary litigation landscape. A critical component of these actions is the ability of class members to “opt out” and thereby exclude themselves from the effect of any class judgment. The tension between individual autonomy and the desire for global resolution of mass controversies has led to an intense debate concerning the circumstances under which opt-out rights should be constrained, if at all.

This Article makes five distinct contributions to the class action literature. First, the Article applies the game theoretic concept of the …

Rediscovering Discovery Ethics, W. Bradley Wendel

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Maximizing Mediation And Arbitration Opportunities, Oregon Law Institute, William M. Mcallister, Sam J. Imperati, Richard G. Spier, Noreen K. Saltviet, Eric B. Lindauer, Ingrid E. Slezak, Lyle C. Velure, Judy S. Henry, Raymond R. Bagley Jr, Don A. Dickey, Kristena A. Lamar, Eve L. Miller

Oregon Law Institute, 1996

Course Materials from the May 23, 1996 Program in Portland

Litigation Outcomes In State And Federal Courts: A Statistical Portrait, Theodore Eisenberg, John Goerdt, Brian Ostrom, David Rottman

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

"U.S. Juries Grow Tougher on Plaintiffs in Lawsuits," the New York Times page-one headline reads. The story details how, in 1992, plaintiffs won 52 percent of the personal injury cases decided by jury verdicts, a decline from the 63 percent plaintiff success rate in 1989. The sound-byte explanations follow, including the notion that juries have learned that they, as part of the general population, ultimately pay the costs of high verdicts. Similar stories, reporting both increases and decreases in jury award levels, regularly make headlines. Jury Verdict Research, Inc. (JVR), a commercial service that sells case outcome information, often is …

Structuring Multiclaim Litigation: Should Rule 23 Be Revised?, William W. Schwarzer

Michigan Law Review

The question whether Rule 23 should be revised therefore is not susceptible to a global answer unless revision is stylistic only, limited to making the text more elegant - and even stylistic revision is likely to have some substantive impact, even if unintended. But if the argument for revision is that the Rule is in some respect deficient and should be made to work better, one must begin by answering the question how it should work. That in tum depends on defining the Rule's purpose - what it is intended to accomplish.This paper examines briefly the purposes for which the …

Xenophilia In American Courts, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Foreigner! The word says it all. Verging on the politically incorrect, the expression is full of connotation and implication. A foreigner will face bias. By such a thought process, many people believe that litigants have much to fear in courts foreign to them. In particular, non-Americans fare badly in American courts. Foreigners believe this. Even Americans believe this.

Such views about American courts are understandable. After all, the grant of alienage jurisdiction to the federal courts, both original and removal, constitutes an official assumption that xenophobic bias is present in state courts. As James Madison said of state courts: “We …

Courts In Cyberspace, Theodore Eisenberg, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Trial By Jury Or Judge: Which Is Speedier?, Theodore Eisenberg, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Many take as a given that jury-tried cases consume more time than judge-tried cases. Judge Richard Posner of the Seventh Circuit, for example, opines: “Court queues are almost always greatest for parties seeking civil jury trials. This makes economic sense. Such trials are more costly than bench trials both because of jury fees (which … understate the true social costs of the jury) and because a case normally takes longer to try to a jury than to a judge …. Parties are therefore “charged” more for jury trials by being made to wait in line longer.”

A close reading reveals …

Class Action Rule Changes: A Midpoint Report, Edward H. Cooper

Articles

This a midpoint progress report of the Reporter on current proposals to amend the class action rule, Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In part, it is one of many calls for help. The proposed amendments have been published for comment. It is important that the rulemakers hear from as many interested observers as possible. One of the pitfalls of the comment process - at least one of the pitfalls that the rulemakers like to believe in - is that there are many observers who believe that the rulemakers have got it right, and do not need …

What's Wrong With This Picture?: Rule Interpleader, The Anti-Injunction Act, In Personam Jurisdiction, And M.C. Escher, Donald L. Doernberg

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The effectiveness of interpleader depends upon the availability of injunctions against other proceedings. There is no congressional authorization of such injunctions for rule interpleader cases. If interpleader were an in rem action, one of the other exceptions to the Anti-Injunction Act might save the day, but the Supreme Court has apparently foreclosed that option. This article examines that three-sided conflict. Part II discusses the problem in greater depth, focusing first on how interpleader functions and why it depends on being “the only game in town.” Part II next addresses the background and interpretation of the Anti-Injunction Act, exploring particularly the …

In-Kind Class Action Settlements, Scott R. Peppet

Publications

No abstract provided.

Reflections Of Judicial Adr And The Multi-Door Courthouse At Twenty: Fait Accompli, Failed Overture, Or Fledgling Adulthood, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Like any trend, ADR has its skeptics and even some opponents. Considerable debate exists regarding the degree to which the increasing ADRization of traditionally judicial activity amounts to triumph or tragedy, a point well-illustrated by the past Schwartz Lectures. In the 1993 Schwartz Lecture, Professor Laura Nader described the ADR movement as a byproduct of society's attempt to suppress or conceal uncomfortable conflicts. In the 1994 Lecture, Professor Judith Resnik essentially concluded that the modern ADR movement has brought a regrettable de facto closing of the court house (or at least raised barriers to entry) and replaced reflective decision-making about …