Litigation Commons^™

A Programmatic Audit Of The Massachusetts Vitamin Litigation Project Final Report, Colleen Manning, Tatjana Meschede, Elaine Werby

Center for Social Policy Publications

The Massachusetts Vitamin Litigation Project resulted in the 2002 partial settlement of a class action lawsuit brought by the law firm of Ellis and Rapacki on behalf of residents of the Commonwealth who purchased indirect vitamin products1 during the period from 1990 through 1999. In return for the release of claims, the defendants (a group of pharmaceutical manufacturers) agreed to pay a settlement amount of more than $19 million to be allocated to charitable organizations providing food and nutrition programs in Massachusetts. An additional $2.5 million in settlement funds was subsequently approved.

A total of 572 grants ranging from $1,000 …

Not Just Doctrine: The True Motivation For Federal Incorporation And International Human Rights Litigation, Daniel Abebe

Faculty Scholarship

The legal status of international human rights litigation under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) has been the subject of much debate, culminating in the Supreme Court's decision in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692 (2004). The debate has been almost exclusively doctrinal and has focused on the Judiciary Act of 1789, the historical treatment of the law of nations as general or federal common law, the evolution of the Supreme Court's international law jurisprudence, and the integration of customary international law (CIL) into the domestic legal system.

This Article argues that the focus on doctrine masks underlying international relations …

Beyond Mitigation: Towards A Theory Of Allocution, Kimberly A. Thomas

Articles

THE COURT: I don't think I have time to listen .... I am not going to reexamine your guilt or innocence here. That is not the purpose of a sentence.. THE DEFENDANT: I did not have the chance to tell you .... THE DEFENDANT: But, your Honor, listen to me-1 Should the court hear this defendant? Is the story of innocence relevant at allocution-the defendant's opportunity to speak on his or her own behalf at the sentencing hearing prior to the imposition of sentence? Or, is the purpose of allocution something different, as the judge suggests? The answers depend on …

The Myth (And Realities) Of Forum Shopping In Transnational Insolvency, John A. E. Pottow

Articles

A decade ago, in 1996, the landscape of transnational insolvencies was vastly different from today. The UNCITRAL Model Law had not been finished, the efforts at the E.U. Insolvency Treaty were jeopardized by mad cows, and no one had heard of Chapter 15. Now, all three universalist projects are up and running, putting universalism in a comfortable state of ascendancy. The paradigm has not been without critics, however, the most persistent and eloquent of which has been Professor Lynn LoPucki. LoPucki has periodically attacked universalism on a number of grounds. These grievances include a sovereigntist complaint of universalism's insensitivity to …

Developments In Connecticut Criminal Law: 2006, Timothy Everett

Faculty Articles and Papers

No abstract provided.

The Overlapping Magisteria Of Law And Science: When Litigation And Science Collide, William G. Childs

Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, the Author explores two unexpected consequences of joining science and law at the hip, and considers whether these consequences represent reciprocal contamination, or instead cross-fertilization, of law and science. In Part I of this Article, the Author provides a brief review of the evolution of legal standards for the admissibility of what is termed "scientific evidence," including Frye and Daubert and their progeny. In Part II of the Article, the Author gives a (necessarily limited) overview of certain modern scientific paradigms of reliability and he explores the realities of peer reviews and of other institutions in science …

The Frcp Alarm Clock Has Rung: Now What?, Sam Panarella

Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings

This article presents steps a company may undertake to begin implementing clear policies and procedures outlining what to do relative to e-discovery practices and responding to electronic discovery requests.

Disney Examined: A Case Study In Corporate Governance And Ceo Succession, Lawrence Lederman

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Enhancing Drug Effectiveness And Efficacy Through Personal Injury Litigation, Anita Bernstein

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Bite Mark Analysis, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

Courts have admitted bite mark comparison evidence in homicide, rape, and child abuse cases. By the 1980s, the technique had gained widespread judicial acceptance. Hundreds of cases have admitted this type of evidence, and no reported case has rejected it. Moreover, some courts speak of bite mark comparison as a "science." Indeed, its acceptance is so well-established that several courts have taken judicial notice of its reliability, implying that the validity of the technique is not subject to reasonable dispute.

Yet, the scientific foundations for bite mark comparisons has never been demonstrated. Such basic issues as the uniqueness of the …

Table Of Contents, Jtaa Editors

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Masthead, Jtaa Editors

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Editor's Note, Jenna Phipps

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

After Crawford: Using The Confrontation Clause In Massachusetts Courts, David A. Lowy, Katherine Bowles Dudich

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Why The Plain View Doctrine Should Not Apply To Digital Evidence, Rayming Chang

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Developing Wind Power Projects In Massachusetts: Anticipating And Avoiding Litigation In The Quest To Harness The Wind, Mike Koehler

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

James Otis, Paul Revere, A Routine Traffic Stop And The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court: When It Comes To Drug-Detection, It's Not Who Let The Dogs Out, It's Who Wouldn't, Ronen Morris

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Seeing The Light: Ignoring Collateral Economic Benefits To The Public When Enforcing Servitudes, Michael S. Schneider

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

State Of Confusion: The Hippa Privacy Rule And State Physician-Patient Privilege Laws In Federal Question Cases, Jenna Phipps

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law - The Knock And Announce Rule Becomes Obsolete - Hudson V. Michigan, 126 S. Ct. 2159 (2006), Rachel Rediker

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

In Re Simone D., Erin E. Martin

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Multinational Class Actions Under Federal Securities Law: Managing Jurisdictional Conflict, Hannah Buxbaum

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This article examines a form of securities class action that is growing increasingly popular in U.S. courts: the foreign cubed action, brought against a foreign issuer on behalf of a class that includes foreign investors who purchased securities on a foreign exchange. These cases are becoming an important part of the regulatory landscape (as evidenced by recent high-profile lawsuits involving issuers such as Vivendi, Bayer and Royal Ahold), and they create the potential for particularly severe conflict with other countries on the question of how best to regulate global economic activity. Yet they point out quite clearly that the traditional …

Consequences Of Power, Tamara Relis

Scholarly Works

This Article challenges a basic premise that litigants and their attorneys broadly understand and desire similar things from litigation-track mediation processes. In providing new empirical research from medical malpractice cases, I offer disconcerting evidence of the surprising degree to which perceptions and meanings ascribed to these litigation-track processes are not only diverse, but frequently contradictory. I demonstrate that notwithstanding their different allegiances, lawyers on all sides of cases have correspondingly similar understandings of the meaning and purpose of litigation-track mediations. At the same time, I show how plaintiffs and defendants have the same understandings and visions of what mediation is …

Doctors & Juries, Philip G. Peters Jr.

Michigan Law Review

Physicians widely believe that jury verdicts are unfair. This Article tests that assumption by synthesizing three decades of jury research. Contrary to popular belief the data show that juries consistently sympathize more with doctors who are sued than with patients who sue them. Physicians win roughly half of the cases that expert reviewers believe physicians should lose and nearly all of the cases that experts feel physicians should win. Defendants and their hired experts, it turns out, are more successful than plaintiffs and their hired experts at persuading juries to reach verdicts contrary to the opinions of independent reviewers.

The Angel Is In The Big Picture: A Response To Lemley, Samson Vermont

Michigan Law Review

An invention within close reach of multiple inventors differs from an invention within distant reach of a lone inventor. The differences between these two archetypes of invention -"reinventables" and "singletons"- remain unexploited under current U.S. law. Should we reform the law to exploit the differences? Mark Lemley and I agree that we should. To date, those economists who have closely examined the issue concur. What are the differences between reinventables and singletons? First, reinventables can be brought into existence with incentives of lower magnitude. This suggests that we can obtain reinventables at a lower price than we currently pay-i.e., with …

Of Frivolous Litigation And Runaway Juries: A View From The Bench, Thomas A. Eaton

Scholarly Works

The political case for tort reform is based in large measure on the perception that there are too many frivolous law suits and too many excessive jury awards. Where there is considerable empirical evidence casting doubt on both these propositions, they remain the linchpins of the tort reform movement. Scholars, lobbyists, and legislators all have had a voice in the tort reform debates. The viewpoints of trial judges, however, have been largely absent. This is unfortunate because trial judges are the government officials with the closest view of the tort litigation system. They are the ones who see tort litigation …

Reassessing Damages In Securities Fraud Class Actions, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

No coherent doctrinal statement exists for calculating open-market damages for securities fraud class actions. Instead, courts have tried in vain to fashion common-law deceit and misrepresentation remedies to fit open-market fraud. The result is a relatively ineffective system with a hallmark feature: unpredictable damage awards. This poses a significant fraud deterrence problem from both a practical and a theoretical standpoint.

In 2005, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to clarify open-market damage principles and to facilitate earlier dismissal of cases without compensable economic losses. Instead, in Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo, it further confused the damage issue by (1) perpetuating the …

The Unbearable Lightness Of Batson: Mixed Motives And Discrimination In Jury Selection, Russell D. Covey

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reassessing Damages In Securities Fraud Class Actions, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Illuminating Secrecy: A New Economic Analysis Of Confidential Settlements, Scott A. Moss

Publications

Even the most hotly contested lawsuits typically end in a confidential settlement forbidding the parties from disclosing their allegations, evidence, or settlement amount. Confidentiality draws fierce criticism for harming third parties by concealing serious misdeeds like discrimination, pollution, defective manufacturing, and sexual abuse. Others defend confidentiality as a mutually beneficial pay-for-silence bargain that facilitates settlement, serves judicial economy, and prevents frivolous copycat lawsuits. This debate is based in economic logic, yet most analyses have been surprisingly shallow as to how confidentiality affects incentives to settle. Depicting a more nuanced, complex reality of litigation and settlement, this Article reaches several conclusions …