Civil Procedure Commons^™

Reflections, Steve Subrin

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Contingency Of Openness In Courts: Changing The Experiences And Logics Of The Public's Role In Court-Based Adr, Judith Resnik

Nevada Law Journal

Debate exists about how much alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”) is used in courts and about the metrics by which to evaluate its impact. Yet on two measures—the volume of rulemaking and the privatization of court-based interactions—the results are unambiguous: courts have promulgated hundreds of rules governing ADR, and those rules rarely protect rights of the public to know much about either the processes or the results. Rather, court-based procedural rules are increasingly becoming contract-promoting rules, encouraging parties to conclude disputes without adjudication.

In this essay in honor of Professor Stephen Subrin, I explore the centrality of “open courts” to judicial …

Revisiting The Integration Of Law And Fact In Contemporary Federal Civil Litigation, Elizabeth M. Schneider

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Dangerous Diagnoses, Risky Assumptions, And The Failed Experiment Of "Sexually Violent Predator" Commitment, Deirdre M. Smith

Faculty Publications

In its 1997 opinion, Kansas v. Hendricks, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a law that reflected a new model of civil commitment. The targets of this new commitment law were dubbed “Sexually Violent Predators” (SVPs), and the Court upheld indefinite detention of these individuals on the assumption that there is a psychiatrically distinct class of individuals who, unlike typical recidivists, have a mental condition that impairs their ability to refrain from violent sexual behavior. And, more specifically, the Court assumed that the justice system could reliably identify the true “predators,” those for whom this unusual and extraordinary deprivation of liberty …

The Forms Had A Function: Rule 84 And The Appendix Of Forms As Guardians Of The Liberal Ethos In Civil Procedure, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

The Appendix of Forms that, from the time of their adoption have accom - panied the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, are a seeming anachronism, more appropriate for a much simpler time that hardly characterizes modem day federal civil litigation. Perhaps the form for a negligence complaint is the most striking in this regard, offering only that at a certain time and place "the defendant negligently drove a motor vehicle against the plaintiff," causing harm.2 Not only does such a complaint fail to typify the negligence claims one might find on any federal docket, but it also fails to reflect …

Electronic Data, Electronic Searching, Inadvertent Production Of Privileged Data: A Perfect Storm, Donald Wochna

Akron Law Review

This article suggests that the practical impact of treating electronic searching as an expert function is to permit attorneys to focus and strategize on the process of electronic searching rather than on the completeness of document production. In effect, electronic searching permits attorneys to quit focusing on finding documents and begin focusing on identifying electronic sources of information on which reside relevant documents that can be extracted by means of electronic searching protocols.

Reconstructing Pleading: Twombly, Iqbal, And The Limited Role Of The Plausibility Inquiry, Stephen R. Brown

Akron Law Review

Although critics have generally failed to appreciate the limited role of the plausibility inquiry, it is still necessary in some cases. I will therefore, in the discussion of plausibility within the three-step framework, provide a general defense of Twombly and Iqbal by recasting the decisions in light of a plaintiff‘s burden to certify to a court that the factual contentions in a complaint ―will likely have evidentiary support under Rule 11. Under this view of the plausibility inquiry, a court acts as a neutral third-party that simply evaluates a plaintiff‘s ability to predict her own likelihood of success. Instead, a …

Summary Judgment In The Shadow Of Erie, Jeffrey O. Cooper

Akron Law Review

This essay addresses one particular challenge to federal summary judgment practice: the possibility of a successful challenge to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, pursuant to Erie Railroad v. Tompkins and its progeny. Part II of this essay addresses differences between summary judgment as practiced in federal courts pursuant to Federal Rule 56 and summary judgment as practiced in state courts, focusing in particular on differences in the ways the federal courts and some state courts allocate the burdens on moving and non-moving parties.Part III suggests that these differences are problematic under Erie and its progeny, and …

Dropping The Spear: The Case For Enhanced Summary Judgment Prior To Class Certification, Linda S. Mullenix

Akron Law Review

This brief article makes the case for enhanced judicial scrutiny of summary judgment motions prior to the class certification decision. This argument is congruent (and convergent) with the Supreme Court‘s summary judgment trilogy, the Court‘s twin pleading decisions in Twombly and Iqbal, the Third Circuit‘s decision in Hydrogen Peroxide, and the suggestions from various quarters that courts ought to evaluate the merits of proposed class actions during the class certification process.to evaluate the merits of proposed class actions during the class certification process. Summary judgment prior to class certification, then, is a logical―and desirable―extension of these trends. This article argues …

Summary Judgment, Pleading, And The Future Of Transsubstantive Procedure, Stephen B. Burbank

Akron Law Review

David Berger Professor for the Administration of Justice, University of Pennsylvania Law School. This article is based on remarks made at the 2010 meeting of the AALS Section on Litigation.

Six Summary Judgment Safeguards, Edward Brunet

Akron Law Review

This article sets forth a more optimistic assessment of the current status of summary judgment. Numerous potential safeguards deter improper grants of summary judgment motions and serve to temper trial judges who are prone to rule favorably on summary judgment requests. While some of the safeguards act more as ineffectual clichés or slogans, others provide a set of significant deterrents to overly adventuresome treatment of Rule 56 motions. The goal of this article is to critique six possible summary judgment safeguards and, in so doing, to determine whether the state of contemporary summary judgment is as bleak as leading critics …

Must, Should, Shall, Steven S. Gensler

Akron Law Review

This Essay has three parts. Parts I and II look backward. Part I tells the story of the switch from ―shall‖ to ―should‖ in 2007. Part II then explains the events that led the Advisory Committee to propose the amendment that, if it takes effect as scheduled on December 1, 2010, will restore ―shall‖ to the text of Rule 56. Part III looks forward. It addresses a single, critical question: how much discretion to deny summary judgment will trial judges have once ―shall‖ is restored? The answer is this: with the restoration of ―shall,‖ trial courts will return to whatever …

Symposium: The Future Of Summary Judgment Foreword - Summary Judgment And The Influence Of Federal Rulemaking, Bernadette Bollas Genetin

Akron Law Review

In this review of the evolving role of summary judgment, Professor Steven Gensler provides insight into whether Rule 56(c) give judges discretion to deny summary judgment even if the preconditions of Rule 56(c) have been met, i.e., if there is no genuine issue of material fact and judgment as a matter of law could be entered, and Professor Edward Brunet engages directly the important debate regarding intemperate use of summary judgment to deny potentially meritorious claims, contending that currently available ―safeguards‖ can prevent inappropriate grant of summary judgment. Professor Stephen Burbank and Professor Linda Mullenix enlarge the discussion to consider …

Summary Of Lisle V. State, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 39 (June 25, 2015), Adam Wynott

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court held that the petitions filed by the appellant, Kevin James Lisle (Lisle), were procedurally barred. The Court determined that a petitioner cannot present new evidence of mitigating circumstances in order to prove actual innocence of the death penalty. The Court determined that the claims of Lisle did not warrant relief and upheld the district court ruling.

"The Tempest": Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. V. Allstate Insurance Co.: The Rules Enabling Act Decision That Added To The Confusion - But Should Not Have, Donald L. Doernberg

Akron Law Review

This Article discusses the effect Shady Grove is likely to have on vertical choice-of-law in cases involving a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure...Part II of the Article discusses the majority opinion. Part III deals with parts II-B and II-C of Justice Scalia’s opinion and with the concurrence. Part IV addresses the dissent. Part V offers a critical evaluation of the opinions. Part VI discusses some of the scholarly interpretations of REA and suggests two possible perspectives on REA’s substantive-rights limitation that make it more understandable in light of the Erie doctrine’s history, easier to navigate, and less of a threat …

Defining The Word: "Maintain"; Context Counts, Jack Friedenthal

Akron Law Review

To understand what a word means, especially one such as “maintain” that has multiple formal definitions, one must consider the background and purpose for which it is utilized.

Reassessing The Avoidance Canon In Erie Cases, Bernadette Bollas Genetin

Akron Law Review

This Article chronicles the Supreme Court’s inconsistent use of an avoidance canon in cases construing the substantive rights limitation of the Rules Enabling Act (Enabling Act or REA). It focuses primarily on the avoidance canon as used in cases under the REA branch of the Erie doctrine but also discusses avoidance in other REA contexts. The Article concludes that a reassessment and refocusing of the avoidance canon in Enabling Act jurisprudence is necessary... This Article explores the purposes and methodology that should guide avoidance in REA cases... I focus, in this Article, primarily on a subset of this group of …

The Fruits Of Shady Grove: Seeing The Forest For The Trees, Glenn S. Koppel

Akron Law Review

Part II will sketch the facts of the case to prepare for an exploration of the roots of Shady Grove in Part III, which traces the evolution of the Court’s Erie jurisprudence. At various points along the way, I will stop to anticipate where one or more of the several opinions in Shady Grove will shed light, in Part IV, on the meaning of Shady Grove

Maintaining Uniform Federal Rules: Why The Shady Grove Plurality Was Right, Mark P. Gaber

Akron Law Review

This Article examines the Court’s decision in Shady Grove, concluding that Justice Scalia’s plurality opinion has the better argument—his approach is the most consonant with precedent and the least disruptive to the careful balance the Court has struck with its Erie line of cases. Part II examines Justice Scalia’s plurality opinion, and considers its strengths and weaknesses. I then turn to Justice Ginsburg’s dissenting opinion, concluding that it rests on a fundamental misapplication of the Erie doctrine, though she admirably attempts to give teeth to the substantive rights limitation of the Rules Enabling Act—a limitation that the Erie doctrine admittedly …

Shady Grove And The Potential Democracy-Enhancing Benefits Of Erie Formalism, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Akron Law Review

Article written as part of Symposium: Erie Under Advisement: The Doctrine After Shady Grove.