Litigation Commons^™

Admiralty - Jurisdiction - For Aviation Tort Claims To Be Brought In Admiralty, A Significant Relationship To Traditional Maritime Activity Must Be Shown, Grier Newlin

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

International Law - Justiciability - Appellants Have Standing To Seek Injunction Against United States Trade With Southern Rhodesia, But Their Suit States A Claim Incapable Of Judicial Resolution, George Shingler

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Environmental Law - Oil Pollution Control - In The Absence Of Federal Preemption And Any Fatal Conflict Between Statutory Schemes, A State May Constitutionally Exercise Its Police Power To Provide For Cleanup Of Oil Spillage And For Recoupment Of Costs Concurrently With The Federal Government, Mary E. Deal

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Standard Investment Agreement: Text And Comments, Philippe Kahn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Judicial Recusation In The Federal Republic Of Germany, Sigmund A. Cohn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Some Structural Dilemmas Of World Organization, C. Wilfred Jenks

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Function Of The International Court Of Justice In The World Community, Ernest A. Gross

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Standing For (And Up To) Separation Of Powers, Kent H. Barnett

Scholarly Works

The U.S. Constitution requires federal agencies to comply with separation-of-powers (or structural) safeguards, such as by obtaining valid appointments, exercising certain limited powers, and being sufficiently subject to the President’s control. Who can best protect these safeguards? A growing number of scholars call for allowing only the political branches — Congress and the President — to defend them. These scholars would limit or end judicial review because private judicial challenges are aberrant to justiciability doctrine and lead courts to meddle in minor matters that rarely effect regulatory outcomes.

This Article defends the right of private parties to assert justiciable structural …

Discouraging Frivolous Copyright Infringement Claims: Fee Shifting Under Rule 11 Or 28 U.S.C. § 1927 As An Alternative To Awarding Attorney's Fees Under Section 505 Of The Copyright Act, David E. Shipley

Scholarly Works

The United States Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons resolved a disagreement over when it is appropriate to award attorney’s fees to a prevailing defendant under section 505 of the Copyright Act, and ended a perceived venue advantage for losing plaintiffs in some jurisdictions. The Court ruled unanimously that courts are correct to give substantial weight to the question of whether the losing side had a reasonable case to fight, but that the objective reasonableness of that side’s position does not give rise to a presumption against fee shifting. It made clear that other factors …

A New "Prospective" On Advance Waivers Of Conflict In Georgia, Charles G. Spalding Jr.

Georgia Law Review

As law firms and their corporate clients continue to expand into different legal jurisdictions, and since the conflict of one attorney is imputed to the attorney's firm, the potential for conflicts of interest increases. A law firm retained to advise a corporate subsidiary in a minor matter in one state may be disqualified from another, more significant matter in a different jurisdiction if the potential client is adverse to the parent company in the initial representation. Without a method for prospective waiver of conflicts, a law firm's only recourse is seeking the consent of the currently represented client. To avoid …

Obtaining International Judicial Assistance Under The Federal Rules And The Hague Convention On The Taking Of Evidence Abroad In Civil And Commercial Matters: An Exposition Of The Procedures And A Practical Example: In Re Westinghouse Uranium Contract Litigation, Robert J. Augustine

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Judging Multidistrict Litigation, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

High-stakes multidistrict litigations saddle the transferee judges who manage them with an odd juxtaposition of power and impotence. On one hand, judges appoint and compensate lead lawyers (who effectively replace parties’ chosen counsel) and promote settlement with scant appellate scrutiny or legislative oversight. But on the other, without the arsenal class certification once afforded, judges are relatively powerless to police the private settlements they encourage. Of course, this power shortage is of little concern since parties consent to settle.

Or do they? Contrary to conventional wisdom, this Article introduces new empirical data revealing that judges appoint an overwhelming number of …

Extraterritorial Jurisdiction - Antitrust - The Impact Of The British Protection Of Trading Interests Act On The United States Antitrust Suit Brought By Laker Airways Against British Airways And British Caledonian., Ward S. Bondurant

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Product Liability Law In Japan: An Introduction To A Developing Area Of Law, Younghee Jin Ottley, Bruce L. Ottley

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Buying Time In Spain: The Spanish Law Of Installment Sales, John M. Steadman

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

European Economic Community - The Use Of Article 173(2) Of The Eec Treaty To Contest Actions Of The European Parliament, Partie Ecologiste 'Les Verts' (The Greens) V. European Parliament, [1987] 2 Comm. Mkt. L.R. 343 (1986)., Scott N. Carlson

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Litigating Customary International Human Rights Norms, Beth Stephens

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

So Help Me God: A Comparative Study Of Religious Interest Group Litigation, Jayanth K. Krishnan, Kevin R. Den Dulk

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

"Mad Plaintiff Disease?" Tobacco Litigation And The British Debate Over Adoption Of U.S.-Style Tort Litigation Methods, Kristen Gartman Rogers

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Remanding Multidistrict Litigation, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

Multidistrict litigation has frequently been described as a “black hole” because transfer is typically a one-way ticket. The numbers lend truth to this proposition. As of 2010, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation remanded only 3.425% of cases to their original districts. That number dwindled to 3.1% in 2012, and to a scant 2.9% in 2013. Retaining cases in hopes of forcing a global settlement can cause a constellation of complications. These concerns range from procedural justice issues over selecting a forum and correcting error, to substantive concerns about fidelity to state laws, to undermining democratic participation ideals fulfilled through …

Some Important Causes For Settlement In American Civil Litigation, Felipe Forte Cobo

LLM Theses and Essays

This paper focuses on pure economic disputes such as contract, real property and tort conflicts, in which the economic efficiency model is very accepted. In this limited scenario, the consensual resolution of disputes is always more efficient than decisions made by a third-party decision-maker, whether from a post-trial or pre-trial perspective.

Considering that lower transaction costs drive parties towards settlement, part II of this essay provides an overview of the American costs of legal disputes, framing several issues that might be determinative to settlements. Part III explores how two specific American procedural institutes – discovery and civil jury trial – …

Does Criminal Diversion Contribute To The Vanishing Civil Trial?, John B. Meixner Jr., Shari Seidman Diamond

Scholarly Works

Through his seminal work on the vanishing trial, Professor Marc Galanter has had a profound impact on public and scholarly discourse about the role of the trial in litigation, documenting the sharp reductions in the rate of civil cases since the mid-twentieth century. While there is little remaining doubt that the American civil trial is an increasingly scarce commodity, there is still much debate as to what has caused the decline.

In this Article, we seek to explore the extent to which the federal criminal docket may be contributing to the rapid disappearance of the civil trial by taking priority …

Toward A Functional Approach To Sovereign Equality, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

Under the principle of sovereign equality of nations, nation states are entitled to equal dignity (evidenced by conventions like their voting rights in the United Nations), have the identical capacity to contract (evidenced by their ability to enter into treaties), and are not subject to a superior sovereign (evidenced by the lack of a global leviathan). This principle also has had an important effect in the field of international civil litigation, in areas such as judicial jurisdiction or sovereign immunity. As that principle has weakened over the twentieth century, risks of aggravation to comity have risen, resulting in the development …

Civility And Collegiality—Unreasonable Judicial Expectations For Lawyers As Officers Of The Court?, Lonnie T. Brown

Scholarly Works

It is a well-settled and often-recited fact that lawyers are “officers of the court.” That title, however, is notoriously hortatory and devoid of meaning. Nevertheless, the Eleventh Circuit recently took the somewhat unprecedented step of utilizing the officer-of-the-court label to, in effect, sanction an attorney for the purportedly uncivil act of failing to provide defendant attorneys with pre-suit notice. While the author applauds the court’s desire to place greater emphasis on lawyer-to-lawyer collegiality as a component of officer-of-the-court status, the uncertainty the decision creates in terms of a lawyer’s role will potentially force litigators to compromise important client-centered duties. This …

Optimal Lead Plaintiffs, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

Adequate representation in securities class actions is, at best, an afterthought and, at worst, usurped and subsumed by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act’s lead-plaintiff appointment process. Once appointed, the lead plaintiff bears a crushing burden: Congress expects her to monitor the attorney, thwart strike suits, and deter fraud, while judges expect her appointment as the “most adequate plaintiff” to resolve intra-class conflicts and adequate-representation problems. But even if she could be all things to all people, the lead plaintiff has little authority to do much aside from appointing lead counsel. Plus, class members in securities-fraud cases have diverse preferences …

Group Consensus, Individual Consent, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

Despite a rise in the number of personal-injury and product-liability cases consolidated through multi-district litigation, a decline in class-certification motions, and several newsworthy nonclass settlements such as the $4.85 billion Vioxx settlement and estimated $700 million Zyprexa settlements, little ink has been spilled on nonclass aggregation’s unique issues. Sections 3.17 and 3.18 of the American Law Institute’s Principles of the Law of Aggregate Litigation are a noteworthy exception. This Article uses those principles as a lens for exploring thematic questions about the value of pluralism, group cohesion, governance, procedural justice, and legitimacy in nonclass aggregation.

Sections 3.17 and 3.18 make …

Damage Anchors On Real Juries, Shari Seidman Diamond, Mary R. Rose, Beth Murphy, John B. Meixner Jr.

Scholarly Works

Experiments reveal anchoring as a powerful force, even when participants see the anchor as irrelevant. Here, we examine the reactions of real deliberating jurors to attorney damage requests and concessions in 31 cases involving 33 plaintiffs in which the jury awarded damages. Jurors were critical consumers of attorney suggestions. They reacted more negatively to, and were less influenced by, plaintiff ad damnums for pain and suffering than to damage requests in categories grounded in more objective evidence. Deliberations revealed that jurors often perceive plaintiff ad damnums not only as irrelevant, but also as outrageous, impressions reflected in their verdicts. These …

Joint Defense Or Research Joint Venture? Reassessing The Patent-Challenge-Bloc's Antitrust Status, Joseph S. Miller

Scholarly Works

A patent challenger who defeats a patent wins spoils that it must share with the world, including all its competitors. This forced sharing undercuts an alleged infringer's incentive to stay in the fight to the finish - especially if the patent owner offers an attractive settlement. Too many settlements, and too few definitive patent challenges, are the result. I have argued previously that a litigation-stage bounty would help correct this tilt against patent challenges, for it would provide cash prizes to successful patent challengers that they alone would enjoy. Even the best-designed bounty, however, would likely fail to encourage patent …

Taxing Punitive Damages, Gregg D. Polsky, Dan Markel

Scholarly Works

There is a curious anomaly in the law of punitive damages. Jurors assess punitive damages in the amount that they believe will best “punish” the defendant. But, in fact, defendants are not always punished to the degree that the jury intends. Under the Internal Revenue Code, punitive damages paid by business defendants are tax deductible and, as a result, these defendants often pay (in real dollars) far less than the jury believes they deserve to pay.

To solve this problem of under-punishment, many scholars and policymakers, including President Obama, have proposed making punitive damages nondeductible in all cases. In our …

Taxing Structured Settlements, Gregg D. Polsky, Brant J. Hellwig

Scholarly Works

Congress has granted a tax subsidy to physically injured tort plaintiffs who enter into structured settlements. The subsidy allows these plaintiffs to exempt from the tax the investment yield imbedded within the structured settlement. The apparent purpose of the subsidy is to encourage physically injured plaintiffs to invest, rather than presently consume, their litigation recoveries. While the statutory subsidy by its terms is available only to physically injured tort plaintiffs, a growing structured settlement industry now contends that the same tax benefit of yield exemption is available to plaintiffs’ lawyers and non-physically injured tort plaintiffs under general, common-law tax principles. …