Litigation Commons^™

The Disadvantaged Plaintiff: Is It Time To Revisit The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, Matthew Engellenner

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law - Revising The Application Of Tinker And Fraser In The Age Of The Internet - J.S. Ex Rel. Snyder V. Blue Mountain School District, 650 F.3d 915 (3d Cir. 2011), Christopher Lynett

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law - Failed The Breathalyzer: Just Contest The Location Of The Stop - Commonwealth V. Virgilio, 947 N.E.2d 1112 (Mass. App. Ct. 2011), Jillise Ketcham

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law - New Evidence In Gateway Claim Of Actual Innocence Requires Evidence Not Previously Available At Trail - Kidd V. Norman, 651 F.3d 947 (8th Cir. 2011), David Cashman

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law - Seventh Circuit Denies Sovereign Immunity Defense To Counterclaims For Appealing State Agency - Board Of Regents Of The University Of Wisconsin System V. Phoenix International Software, Inc., 653 F.3d 448 (7th Cir. 2011), Daniel S. Tyler

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Changes In The European Union's Regime Of Recognizing And Enforcing Judgments And Transnational Litigation In The United States, Samuel P. Baumgartner

Akron Law Faculty Publications

The European Commission has proposed to amend (recast) the Brussels I Regulation, which governs jurisdiction to adjudicate, parallel proceedings, and judgments recognition within the European Union. Although much of the Brussels I Regulation is simply the 1968 Brussels Convention cast into European Union legislation, the proposed amendments are part of a deeper set of structural and conceptual changes in the law of transnational litigation within the Union over the past couple of decades. Understanding these changes is essential to understanding what drives the proposed amendments and what is likely to follow.

In this paper – presented at the symposium Our …

Rejecting Sovereign Immunity In Public Law Litigation, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Plausibility Pleading And Employment Discrimination, Suzette M. Malveaux

Publications

No abstract provided.

Five Mistakes For New Child-Welfare Lawyers To Avoid, Jennifer Baum

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

You’ve graduated, passed the bar, and started your first legal job working with children and families. Perhaps you work for an institutional provider of legal services for children or as a prosecutor of dependency cases, or perhaps you are defending such cases. Perhaps, still, you are in private practice, and this is your first pro bono experience working on a family or juvenile court matter. Whatever your role, your job is the same: to represent your client and seek as favorable an outcome as possible.

But you are new—you don’t know the ropes or who the players are, you …

The Underappreciated Importance Of The Sequence In Which The Issues Are Addressed In Contract Litigation, Gregory S. Crespi

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Judicial opinions rarely identify the precise sequence in which the issues presented were addressed by the court. Since this sequence is not generally regarded as being significant for the decisions reached, persons later parsing the opinions for their significance rarely go to the considerable trouble involved in acquiring the litigation briefs and interviewing the attorneys and judges involved so as to ascertain this sequence. However, my surmise is that at least in contract litigation the sequence in which the issues are addressed can sometimes be significant or even outcome-determinative for the results. A good example of this is presented by …

Arbitrability And Vulnerability, Carolyn L. Dessin

Akron Law Faculty Publications

Arbitration is cool. Everybody‟s doing it. In the eighty-five years since the passage of the Federal Arbitration Act, that seems to be the prevailing sentiment. Recent decades have seen the meteoric rise of arbitration as a form of alternative dispute resolution. Arbitration is widely regarded as a less expensive, more expeditious alternative to litigation.

Courts frequently note that federal policy clearly favors arbitration. No judicial enthusiasm for arbitration seems more complete than that evidenced in the jurisprudence of the United States Supreme Court.

Along with the rise of arbitration, however, there has also been a rise in the amount of …

Aggregate Litigation Goes Public: Representative Suits By State Attorneys General, Margaret H. Lemos

Faculty Scholarship

State attorneys general represent their citizens in aggregate litigation that bears a striking resemblance to the much-maligned damages class action. Yet, while class actions are subject to a raft of procedural rules designed to protect absent class members, equivalent suits in the public sphere are largely free from constraint. The procedural disconnect between the two categories of aggregate litigation reflects a widespread assumption that attorneys general will adequately represent the interests of the state’s citizens, obviating any need for case-specific mechanisms for assuring the loyalty of lawyer to client.

This Article challenges the presumption of adequate public representation. By conflating …

Japan's Love For Derivative Actions: Irrational Behavior And Non-Economic Motives As Rational Explanations For Shareholder Litigation, Dan W. Puchniak, Masafumi Nakahigashi

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Not long ago, there was a consensus in the legal academy that the Japanese were irrational litigants. As the theory went, Japanese people would forgo litigating for financial gain because of a cultural obsession with maintaining social harmony. Based on this theory, it made perfect (but economically irrational) sense that Japanese shareholders let their U.S.-transplanted derivative action lay moribund for almost four post-war decades, while at the same time the derivative action was a staple of shareholder litigation in the United States.

The 1980s brought a wave of law and economics to the scholarship of Japanese law, which largely discredited …

Litigation Finance: What Do Judges Need To Know?, Bert Huang

Faculty Scholarship

In our classic image of an American lawsuit, including class actions, the plaintiffs lawyer pays the upfront costs and then hopes to recoup them from a share of the winnings. But today, this picture is incomplete. It is no longer only the law firm's own war chest that finances a case – so can outside investors and lenders. As Judge Hellerstein has just reminded us, the 9/11 cases he presided over involved such third-party financing. The Ecuadorian plaintiffs' environmental case against Chevron, now pending in the Southern District of New York, is another prominent example in the news.

Managing Summary Judgment, Steven S. Gensler, Lee Rosenthal

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

Introduction, Paul Finkelman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Political Show Trial In The Northern District: Oberlin-Wellington Fugitive Slave Rescue Case, Paul Finkelman

Faculty Scholarship

This chapter from Justice and Legal Change on the Shores of Lake Erie, examines the first important cases ever heard by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The cases, known as the Oberlin-Wellington Fugitive Slave Cases -- stemmed out of the rescue of a fugitive slave from the custody of a professional slave catcher. The fugitive was seized in Oberlin, and taken to nearby Wellington, and held in hotel while the slave catchers waiting for a train to take them to Columbus. Meanwhile, a mob -- consisting mostly of Oberlin residents, including many Oberlin College …

Patent Law As Public Law, Megan M. La Belle

Scholarly Articles

Historically, patent litigation has been viewed and treated primarily as private law litigation, as opposed to public law litigation. This paradigm has begun to shift, however, as various stakeholders have come to acknowledge the profound impact that the patent system – and particularly invalid patents – have on the public at large. Yet, in order for a public law regime to succeed, there must be a host of enforcement mechanisms available, including the opportunity for privately-initiated litigation.

Public interest organizations have played a prominent role in the enforcement of certain public rights, such as free speech, equal protection, and environmental …

The Future Of Internet-Related Personal Jurisdiction After Goodyear Dunlap Tires V. Brown And J. Mcintyre V. Nicastro, Megan M. La Belle

Scholarly Articles

For the past two decades, courts have struggled with the question of how Internet-related contacts should be treated in the personal jurisdiction analysis. Some courts have utilized the traditional minimum contacts framework of International Shoe v. Washington , while others have devised new tests to accommodate this technological evolution. So when the US Supreme Court granted certiorari in two personal jurisdiction cases last term— Goodyear Dunlap Tires v. Brown and J. McIntyre v. Nicastro — many believed these unsettled questions of Internet related personal jurisdiction would finally be resolved. Disappointingly for litigants, lower courts, and academics, however, Goodyear and McIntyre …

Information Lost And Found, Frederic M. Bloom

Publications

At the core of every lawsuit is a mix of information-revealing documents that chronicle a party's malfeasance, guarded memos that outline a lawyer's trial strategy, fading memories that recall a jury's key mistakes. Yet the law's system for managing that information is still poorly understood. This Article makes new and better sense of that system. It begins with an original examination of five pieces of our civil information architecture--evidence tampering rules, automatic disclosure requirements, work product doctrine, peremptory challenge law, and bans on juror testimony--and compiles a novel study of how those doctrines intersect and overlap. It then fits these …

Suing Courts, Frederic Bloom, Christopher Serkin

Publications

This Article argues for a new and unexpected mechanism of judicial accountability: suing courts. Current models of court accountability focus almost entirely on correcting legal errors. A suit against the court would concentrate on something different--on providing transition relief, by way of legal remedy, to those bearing the heaviest burdens of desirable legal change. These suits may at first appear impossible. But suing courts is conceptually rational and mechanically reasonable, a tool that eases legal transitions while navigating the many hurdles modern doctrine puts in the way. This Article sets out the first complete account of how, where, and why …

Is Canada The New Shangri-La Of Global Securities Class Actions?, Tanya J. Monestier

Journal Articles

There has been significant academic buzz about Silver v. Imax, an Ontario case certifying a global class of shareholders alleging statutory and common law misrepresentation in connection with a secondary market distribution of shares. Although global class actions on a more limited scale have been certified in Canada prior to Imax, it can now be said that global classes have “officially” arrived in Canada. Many predict that the Imax decision means that Ontario will become the new center for the resolution of global securities disputes. This is particularly so after the United States largely relinquished this role in Morrison v. …