Litigation Commons^™

Legislative Development, The Attorney Accountability Act: A Case Study Of The Complexities Of Incentive-Based Legal Reform, Jamie S. Henikoff, Scott R. Peppet

Publications

No abstract provided.

Third-Party Modification Of Protective Orders Under Rule 26©, Patrick S. Kim

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that similarly situated litigants always should be given access to protected discovered materials, while nonlitigants should gain access to protected materials only in exceptional circumstances. This approach effectively balances the privacy and property interests of the original parties and the intervening parties with the interests of adjudicative efficiency. Part I establishes that there is no general public right of access to civil discovery and that courts should disregard such purported rights when considering whether to modify a protective order. Part II identifies three interests that courts should weigh when considering whether to modify a protective order: the …

Mandatory Disclosure And Local Abrogation: In Search Of A Theory For Optional Rules, Lauren K. Robel

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Discovery Cost Allocation: Comment On Cooter And Rubinfeld, Edward H. Cooper

Articles

Discovery practice continues to be the single most troubling element of contemporary procedure. To be sure, the system seems to work well in a high proportion of all federal cases. The proportion may seem astonishingly high in relation to the amount of attention devoted to discovery. The discovery problems that occur in a relatively small proportion of the federal caseload, however, impose serious burdens on the parties and the court system. Every proposal that addresses discovery "abuse" deserves serious attention. These comments focus on the discovery abuse portion of the paper by Cooter and Rubinfeld. Questions are posed that may …

Toward A Liberal Application Of The "Close Of All The Evidence" Requirement Of Rule 50(B) Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure: Embracing Fairness Over Formalism, Rollin A. Ransom

Michigan Law Review

This Note examines the language and purposes of rule 50 to determine if and when a relaxed application of its requirements is appropriate. Part I considers the terms and goal of the rule and concludes that its purpose is to put the party opposing the motion for judgment as a matter of law on notice of the movant's assertion that the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law, and to provide the opposing party an opportunity to "cure." Part II discusses courts' varying application of the requirement that a motion for judgment as a matter of law made at …

New Rule 50 May End Directed Verdicts For Plaintiffs, Michael J. Waggoner

Publications

No abstract provided.

Giving Notice: An Argument For Notification Of Putative Plaintiffs In Complex Litigation, Marjorie A. Silver

Scholarly Works

Professor Silver advocates recognition of an inherent judicial power to send or authorize notice of pending litigation to potentially interested persons with unfiled claims. Recognizing such a judicial power is consistent with recent legal developments establishing a role for judges in expediting and managing federal litigation. Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure only explicitly provide for notice to potential parties in Rule 23 class action litigation, Professor Silver demonstrates that a more general judicial power to notify putative plaintiffs is consistent with the federal rules and the Constitution. She also shows that the first amendment values support a judicial …

Preclusion And Procedural Due Process In Rule 23(B)(2) Class Actions, Mark C. Weber

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Article examines whether Rule 23(b)(2) violates the procedural due process rights of absent class members by binding them to the judgment in a class case without notice of the suit. It concludes that the Rule almost certainly violates due process and proposes a reform that would permit nonbinding class actions similar to the old "spurious" class suits.

Procedural And Substantive Problems In Complex Litigation Arising From Disasters, Jack B. Weinstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Class Actions And Duplicative Litigation, Edward F. Sherman

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Proposals To Amend Rule 68- Time To Abandon Ship, Stephen B. Burbank

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

It is no surprise that, having included "facilitating the settlement of the case" as one of the objectives of pretrial conferences in the 1983 amendments to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Advisory Committee has turned its attention to Rule 68. The Rule was intended to provide an incentive to settle by requiring that a prevailing claimant who has declined a more favorable offer of judgment pay post-offer "costs." But, in the Advisory Committee's view, Rule 68 has proved ineffective. The concern, apparently, is not that too few civil cases filed in federal court are settled-less …

Developing Standards Under Amended Rule 11 Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is designed to ensure the integrity of pleadings and other papers filed in federal district court. The rule was amended in 1983 in response to the widely held perception that its provisions, as originally promulgated, had proven ineffective in deterring strike suits, litigation abuses, and lawsuits used as instruments of delay and oppression. Amended Rule 11 introduces more stringent standards designed to make attorneys stop and think about their legal obligations before signing pleadings and motions. These obligations are reinforced by imposing mandatory sanctions upon violation of the standards. The …

The August 1, 1983 Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure: A Critical Evaluation And A Proposal For More Effective Discovery Through Local Rules, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

The 1983 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1983 amendments) represent by far the most ambitious effort to date to remedy the widely perceived problem of discovery abuse in federal practice. These amendments are designed to improve the conduct of discovery by eliminating improper practices and making discovery more cost-effective for the parties, and thereby helping the pretrial phase of an action to run more smoothly. The 1983 discovery amendments have three basic thrusts: (1) active involvement by the court in the pretrial phases of a case pursuant to rule 16; (2) recognition of specific limitations on …

Statutes Of Limitations And Defendant Class Actions, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that in defendant class actions the statute of limitations should be tolled as to all named and absent class members upon informal notice given by the plaintiff at the beginning of the suit. Part I examines the purposes of statutes of limitations and class actions, and the manner in which these purposes were reconciled in American Pipe. It concludes that American Pipe requires the creation of a tolling doctrine that promotes both the fair notice policy that underlies statutes of limitations and the concern for litigative economy that underlies rule 23 class actions. Part II then …

Discovery Of Nonparties' Tangible Things Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Sarah N. Welling

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 through 37 describe procedures for pretrial discovery. While one may employ all the methods of discovery against parties, discovery methods for nonparties are much more limited. For example, with the exception of the independent action under subdivision (c), the procedures detailed in Federal Rule 34 regarding production of tangible things do not apply to nonparties. Frequently, though, a litigant must discover tangible things in the possession, custody, or control of a nonparty. Although the federal rules do provide alternative methods for the discovery of nonparties' things, the whole discovery scheme for nonparties is rather …

Class Actions: Judicial Control Of Defense Communication With Absent Class Members, Donald D. Levenhagen

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Curbing Litigation Abuses: Judicial Control Of Adversary Ethics—The Model Rules Of Professional Conduct And Proposed Amendments To The Rules Of Civil Procedure, Richard H. Underwood

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This Article addresses the effectiveness of recent developments and proposals related to abusive litigation, and discusses them in the context of recent opinions illustrating the power of the trial judge to control the excesses of the adversary system. It rejects the countersuit as a time-consuming and costly means of controlling litigation abuses, and concludes that “tinkering changes” in the rules of procedure cannot bring about true reform. It is urged here that the burden resulting from abuse of litigation can only be relieved by changes which foster stronger judicial control of adversarial ethics, and greater judicial involvement in the pretrial …

Conflict And Dissent In Class Actions: A Suggested Perspective, Bryant G. Garth

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

A Proposed Amendment To Rule 26(B)(4)(B): The Expert Twice Retained, Andrew J. Miller

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This article will focus on whether the hiring of the free agent as a non-trial expert, in order to conceal information from other parties to the litigation, is in keeping with the underlying goals and values of present discovery practice. Part I of this note discusses the discoverability of experts in general, then examines the various rationales underlying the so-called unfairness doctrine supporting the trial/non-trial expert distinction. Part II presents the case for divergent treatment of the free agent and the regularly retained expert. Subpart A of that section will explain the lack of judicial scrutiny in this area, while …

A Review Of Prisoners' Rights Litigation Under 42 U .S.C . §1983, Scott D. Anderson, Theodore I. Brenner, Vera Duke, James E. Gray, Ronald M. Maupin

University of Richmond Law Review

Before the mid-1960's, the federal courts frequently invoked the "hands-off" doctrine, a rule of deference to state correctional administrators, when petitioned by inmates to review conditions in state jails and prisons. When applied, the doctrine essentially held that a state prisoner's grievance was beyond the scope of authority or competence ofthe federal judiciary. With an increasing realization during the late 1960's and early 1970's that federal court intervention into state prison matters would be necessary, the 42 U.S.C. § 19831 civil rights complaint became the leading tool for effecting change in the area of prisoners rights. In order to gain …

Shareholder Derivative Actions: A Modest Proposal To Revise Federal Rule 23.1, Robert A. Kessler

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The purpose of this article is to suggest the addition of two words, "if necessary"-or better yet, the phrase "if necessary under the law of the forum state"-to clause (1) of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.1. This Rule sets forth the requirements for a shareholder's derivative action in the federal courts.

The Consumer Class Action, Arthur H. Travers Jr., Jonathan M. Landers

Publications

No abstract provided.

In Defense Of The Doctrine Of Mutuality Of Estoppel, Edwin H. Greenebaum

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Revitalization Of The International Judicial Assistance Procedures Of The United States: Service Of Documents And Takings Of Testimony, Richard F. Gerber

Michigan Law Review

This comment will examine two aspects of such judicial assistance-service. of documents and taking of testimony-and it will analyze each from the viewpoint of assistance obtained abroad in aid of American litigation as well as assistance rendered within the United States in aid of foreign litigation. It will attempt to survey some of the problems involved in securing performance of these acts, indicate the changes in current practice which are likely to result from the revisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the proposed amendments to the Judicial Code, and, last, suggest some additional measures which might promote …

Compulsory Joinder Of Parties In Civil Actions, John W. Reed

Michigan Law Review

Compulsory joinder cases involving interests in land display one peculiar and important characteristic: there is almost never any need in the state courts to wrestle with the question of whether a person is indispensable as distinguished from necessary. One hastens to add that this attribute of land cases appears to have gone largely unnoticed, but it exists none the less. It arises out of the fact that in a suit involving real property it is never impossible for the court to obtain jurisdiction over all persons interested therein to an extent which will enable the court to adjudicate controversies over …

Compulsory Joinder Of Parties In Civil Actions, John W. Reed

Articles

The plaintiff in a civil cause ordinarily is permitted to select the persons with whom he will litigate. The initial designation of parties to an action is made by the plaintiff, and if he chooses to sue B and not A,' that is ordinarily of no concern to B or to A or to the court. So also where the plaintiff without A as co-plaintiff sues B. Not always, however, is the plaintiff permitted unfettered choice in naming the parties to his lawsuit. On the one hand there are persons whose relationship to the situation in litigation is outside the …