Civil Procedure Commons^™

The Inextricable Merits Problem In Personal Jurisdiction, Cassandra Burke Robertson

Faculty Publications

In 1984, Hollywood star Shirley Jones convinced the Supreme Court to adopt an effects-based test for personal jurisdiction when she brought suit in California against a Florida defendant for defaming her reputation. After adopting the test in Calder v. Jones, the Court never returned to the issue, and in fact avoided personal jurisdiction questions entirely for more than two decades. This past spring, however, the Supreme Court not only revisited the personal jurisdiction doctrine but also signaled an intention to return to personal jurisdiction issues in the near future, with two justices calling specifically for development of the doctrine in …

Private Transfer Fees: Developer Exploitation Or Legitimate Financing Vehicle, Burke T. Ward, Jamie P. Hopkins

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

A private transfer fee (PTF) is typically created when a developer or homeowner decides to attach a covenant to the title of the home. This covenant, the PTF covenant, attaches the PTF to the real property. These covenants require payment of a fee—typically stated as one percent of the property's sale price—upon each resale or transfer of the property and often survive for a period of ninety-nine years. The recipients or owners of the PTF (PTF beneficiaries) can be almost anyone, including property developers, PTF developers, home owner associations (HOA), private investors, state governments, and non-profit charities. Usually, the PTF …

The Rise Of The Common Law Of Federal Pleading: Iqbal, Twombly, And The Application Of Judicial Experience, Henry S. Noyes

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

SINCE 1938, Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Federal Rules or Rules) has set the standard for how much a plaintiff must allege at the outset of a lawsuit in order to avoid dismissal for failure to state a claim. Rule 8 requires that a plaintiff must include in the complaint "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Federal courts developed a well-settled set of principles to apply when deciding whether to dismiss a claim. Among these principles are the following: (1) the plaintiffs factual allegations are accepted …

Managing Summary Judgment, Steven S. Gensler, Lee Rosenthal

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

Cruises, Class Actions, And The Court, David Korn, David Rosenberg

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat

As the Carnival Triumph debacle splashed across the national consciousness, lawyers shook their heads. Sensationalist news coverage exposed common knowledge in the legal community: cruise passengers have little recourse against carriers, and, as a result, they often bear the brunt of serious physical and financial injuries. Cruise lines, escaping legal accountability for their negligence, sail off undeterred from neglecting passenger safety on future voyages. While its previous decisions helped entrench this problem, a recently argued case presents the Supreme Court with another opportunity to address it.

Why American Express V. Italian Colors Does Not Matter And Coordinated Pursuit Of Aggregate Claims May Be A Viable Option After Concepcion, Gregory C. Cook

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat

This Comment suggests that the upcoming decision by the Supreme Court in American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant will not change the class action landscape. While the plaintiff bar contends that certain public policy goals will be lost as a result of American Express and AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, this Comment argues that, in the correct circumstances, coordinated individual arbitrations can address at least some of these public policy goals and plaintiff counsel should focus on such coordination efforts (including, for instance, ethically recruiting actually-injured plaintiffs, the use of common plaintiff counsel, the use of common experts, and …

Open The Door, Not The Floodgates: Controlling Qui Tam Litigation Under The False Claims Act, Christopher M. Alexion

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Party's Over: Admissibility Of Post-Trial Juror Testimony Should Depend On The Nature Of The Conduct, Justin Gillett

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat

What do you call a weeklong period in which you and a handful of acquaintances drink alcohol every day at lunch, sleep though the afternoons, smoke marijuana and ingest a couple lines of cocaine on occasion? You call it the time when a jury convicted Anthony Tanner and William Conover of conspiracy to defraud the United States and commit various acts of mail fraud. Under a current rule of evidence, which precludes juror testimony to impeach a verdict except on extraneous prejudicial information, juror intoxication is not an external influence about which jurors may testify. A new test for the …

Ripple Effects: The Unintended Change To Jurisdictional Pleading Standards After Iqbal, James E. Von Der Heydt

Cleveland State Law Review

This Note describes a little-observed ripple effect of the new pleading standard announced in Iqbal, the antiterrorism case whose holding swept broadly and changed the ground rules for considering allegations in so-called 12(b)(6) motions for all civil cases. This Note examines the interplay between the Twombly/Iqbal doctrine and federal courts’ practical approach to subject-matter jurisdiction. Part II describes the background jurisprudence on subject-matter jurisdiction, including the sharp line the Supreme Court has consistently re-drawn between claims lacking merit and those lacking jurisdictional basis, from Bell v. Hood through Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp. The consistent theme of this jurisprudence …

Proof Of Classwide Injury, Sergio J. Campos

Articles

No abstract provided.

Civil Procedure And Contract Law—Contractual Forum-Selection Clauses In Erie Cases: More Than Substance Or Procedure, James C. Mcneal

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

The enforceability of forum-selection clauses is one of the most litigated jurisdictional issues in federal district courts. In a globalized society, forum-selection clauses reduce uncertainty. However, they present unique problems and, although they are liberally enforced by state and federal courts, forum-selection clauses are not always enforced by the forum court. Enforcement of forum-selection clauses is especially complex in diversity actions in federal court.

Forum-selection clauses appear substantive and often have substantive effects; however, they operate procedurally. Federal courts unanimously hold that the validity of a forum-selection clause is a procedural question and therefore the question of validity is decided …

Untangling Jurisdiction And Contract Scope Issues Within Intellectual Property Licenses, Brandon Beam

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

Copyright license cases pose difficult issues regarding the mixture of federal copyright law and state contract law for courts and commentators alike. Specifically, a split exists over which cases "arise under" federal copyright law. This complication is compounded by the difficulty in predicting federal preemption of state contract law.

In an effort to stabilize these complications, this comment recommends an approach of split sovereignty that would empower different systems to control the areas they are designated to regulate. In particular, the author suggests that procedural issues in copyright license cases should be clarified by (1) governing exclusive federal jurisdiction under …

If It’S Broken, Let Them Fix It: Why The Gebser Pre-Litigation Notice Requirement Should Apply To Title Ix Athletics Lawsuits, Zachary Swartz

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Meaning Of Mcintyre, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

When certiorari was granted in J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro, 131 S. Ct. 2780 (2011), many hoped that the Supreme Court would provide much-needed clarification to the area of personal jurisdiction. It didn’t. The Court failed to generate a majority opinion, splitting into Justice Kennedy’s four-Justice plurality, Justice Breyer’s two-Justice concurrence, and Justice Ginsburg’s three-Justice dissent.

This essay – for the Southwestern Journal of International Law’s 2012 symposium “Our Courts and the World: Transnational Litigation and Procedure” – examines how state and federal courts have been using the McIntyre decision. Some lower court opinions have mistakenly interpreted McIntyre as …

Magic Words And The Erie Doctrine, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Book Review: 'E-Discovery In Canada' By Todd J. Burke, Kelly Friedman, Andrew J. Mccreary, James Morton, Susan Nickle, Vincenzo Rondinelli, Glenn Smith, James Swanson & Susan Wortzman, Robert Currie

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

It is not hyperbolic to say that the proliferation of electronically stored information (ESI) is probably the most prominent change-harbinger and potential havoc-wreaker in civil litigation today — second only, perhaps, to the spiralling costs of litigation itself. Indeed, the practical and legal difficulties associated with the storage, gathering, preservation, disclosure and evidentiary use of ESI have the potential to act as a Trojan Horse, causing what would previously have been ordinary cases to implode under their weight. Increasing recognition of this is evident; electronic discovery (e-discovery) cases have begun to emerge in the reports, a successful co-operative effort by …

King Arthur Confronts Twiqy Pleading, Edward H. Cooper

Articles

Rule 25 of the 1912 Equity Rules stated that "it shall be sufficient that a bill in equity shall contain ... a short and simple statement of the ultimate facts upon which the plaintiff asks relief, omitting any mere statement of evidence." Not mere conclusions, not evidence, but "ultimate facts." And, at that, not facts "constituting the cause of action." The bare words of Rule 25 could mean something quite different to a twenty-first-century audience than they meant to a twentieth-century audience. But they may serve as a foil to the challenge framed by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic …

Regulatory Litigation In The European Union: Does The U.S. Class Action Have A New Analogue?, S. I. Strong

Faculty Articles

The United States has long embraced the concept of regulatory litigation, whereby individual litigants, often termed “private attorneys general,” are allowed to enforce certain public laws as a matter of institutional design. Although several types of regulatory litigation exist, the U.S. class action is often considered the paradigmatic model for this type of private regulation.

For years, the United States appeared to be the sole proponent of both regulatory litigation and large-scale litigation. However, in February 2012, the European Union dramatically reversed its existing policies toward mass claims resolution when the European Parliament adopted a resolution proposing to create a …

Private Parties, Legislators, And The Government's Mantle: On Intervention And Article Iii Standing, Suzanne B. Goldberg

Faculty Scholarship

This essay takes up questions regarding whether initiative proponents and legislators can defend a law in federal court when the government declines to defend. Looking first at intervention under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, I argue that neither has the cognizable interest needed to enter an ongoing lawsuit as a party. Yet even if they are allowed to intervene, these would-be defenders of state or federal law cannot take on the government’s mantle to satisfy Article III because the government’s standing derives from the risk to its enforcement powers, which is an interest that cannot be delegated to others. …

Qui Tam: Is False Claims Law A Model For International Law?, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.