Civil Procedure Commons^™

Summary Of Otak Nevada, Llc V. Dist. Ct., 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 53, Jason Wallace

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Petition for writ of mandamus challenging the Eighth Judicial District Court’s orders that pleadings alleging nonresidential construction malpractice, initially filed without attorney affidavits and expert reports, were valid under NRS 11.258.

Beyond Common Sense: A Social Psychological Study Of Iqbal's Effect On Claims Of Race Discrimination, Victor D. Quintanilla

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) once operated as a notice pleading rule, requiring plaintiffs to set forth only a "short and plain" statement of their claim. In Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, and then Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the United States Supreme Court recast Rule 8(a) into a plausibility pleading standard. To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter "to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Iqbal requires federal courts, when deciding whether a complaint is plausible, to draw on their "judicial experience and common sense." Courts apply this standard …

Tangible "Intangibles" And Other Mysteries: A Critique Of The D.C. Circuit's Expansion Of Work Product Doctrine In United States V. Deloitte Llp, Brian L. Blaylock

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Shielding Hippocrates: Nevada's Expanded Pleading Standard For Medical Malpractice Actions And The Need For Legislative Reform, Justin Shiroff

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Younger Abstention And Its Aftermath: An Empricial Perspective, Joshua G. Urquhart

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

13th Annual Open Government Summit: Access To Public Records Act & Open Meetings Act, 2011, Department Of Attorney General, State Of Rhode Island

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Hawkins V. State, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 50, Christopher Scott Connell

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a District Court judgment of conviction, by way of a jury verdict, of conspiracy to violate the Uniform Controlled Substances Act.

Summary Of Roethlisberger V. Mcnulty, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 48, Michael Roche

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a district court order denying a motion for a change of venue in a tort action.

Summary Of Lvmpd V. Coregis Insurance Co., 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 47, Charles Gianelloni

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Consolidated appeals from a district court summary judgment in an insurance action and from a post-judgment order denying an NRCP 60(b) motion.

Civil Procedure’S Five Big Ideas, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers

Civil procedure, more than any other of the basic law-school courses, conveys to students an understanding of the whole legal system. I propose that this purpose should become more openly the organizing theme of the course. The focus should remain, of course, on the mechanics of the judicial branch. What I am championing is giving some conscious attention, albeit mainly in the background and at an introductory level, to the big ideas of the constitutional structure within which the law formulates civil procedure. Such attention would unify the doctrinal study, while enriching it for the students and revealing its true …

Summary Of Costello V. Casler, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 36, Danielle Woodrum

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An appeal from a district court summary judgment in a tort action where the defendant was deceased prior to the filing of the complaint and the statute of limitations had run before the decedent’s estate could be added to the complaint.

Summary Of Pasillas V. Hsbc Bank Usa, Et. Al., 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 39, Meredith Still

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An appeal from a district court order denying a petition for judicial review arising in a foreclosure mediation action.

Live Hearings And Paper Trials, Emily Spottswood

Scholarly Publications

This Article explores a constantly recurring procedural question: When is fact-finding improved by a live hearing or trial, and when would it be better to rely on a written record? Unfortunately, when judges, lawyers, and rulemakers consider this issue, they are led astray by the widely shared—but false—assumption that a judge can best determine issues of credibility by viewing the demeanor of witnesses while they are testifying. In fact, a large body of scientific evidence indicates that judges are more likely to be deceived by lying or mistaken witnesses when observing live testimony than if the judges were to review …

Our Class Action Federalism: Erie And The Rules Enabling Act After Shady Grove, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

The intersection of federalism and class-action litigation has been an area of significant controversy in recent years. With the 2005 Class Action Fairness Act placing more high-stakes class actions into federal court, an especially crucial question is the extent to which the Erie doctrine and the Rules Enabling Act (REA) require federal courts to follow state class-action law. The Supreme Court’s decision in Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co. begins to confront this issue, but many unanswered questions remain. Under several lines of argument that were neither made nor considered in Shady Grove, the Erie doctrine and the …

The Repressible Myth Of Shady Grove, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This Article untangles the effects of the Supreme Court's latest word on the Erie doctrine, by taking the vantage point of a lower court trying to uncover the logical implications of the Court's new pronouncement. First, Shady Grove lightly confirms the limited role of constitutional constraints. Second, it sheds only a little light on judicial choice-of-law methodology. Third, by contrast, it does considerably clarify the conflict between Federal Rules and state law: if a Rule regulates procedure, then it is valid and applicable without exception in all federal cases, to the extent of its coverage; in determining the Rule's coverage, …

Shedding Light On Shady Grove: Further Reflections On The Erie Doctrine From A Conflicts Perspective, Joseph P. Bauer

Journal Articles

This Article, a contribution to the Notre Dame Law Review symposium issue on the Supreme Court’s recent Shady Grove decision, is a follow-up to an article published in the same journal eleven years ago, in which I suggested that the Erie doctrine could be usefully informed by drawing on caselaw and jurisprudence from the horizontal choice of law setting. Shady Grove addressed the question of whether a New York state law, barring the assertion of claims for statutory damages, was binding in an action brought in the federal courts, or whether Federal Rule 23, which does not contain a similar …

Contract And Procedure, Peter B. Rutledge, Christopher R, Drahozal

Scholarly Works

This paper examines both the theoretical underpinnings and empirical picture of procedural contracts. Procedural contracts may be understood as contracts in which parties regulate not merely their commercial relations but also the procedures by which disputes over those relations will be resolved. Those procedural contracts regulate not simply the forum in which disputes will be resolved (arbitration vs litigation) but also the applicable procedural framework (discovery, class action waivers, remedies limitations, etc.). At a theoretical level, this paper explores both the limits on parties' ability to regulate procedure by contract (at issue in the Supreme Court's recent Rent-A-Center decision) and …

Stolen Art, Looted Antiquities, And The Insurable Interest Requirement, Robert L. Tucker

Akron Law Faculty Publications

Trafficking in stolen art and looted antiquities is a multi-billion dollar enterprise. Stolen art and looted antiquities are ultimately sold to museums or private collectors. Sometimes the purchasers acquire them in good faith. But other times, the purchasers know, suspect, or willfully blind themselves to the possibility that the piece was stolen or illegally excavated and exported up the chain of title.

This problem is compounded by customs and course of dealing in the art and antiquities trade. Dealers generally decline to provide meaningful information to prospective purchasers about the provenance of a piece, and sophisticated purchasers customarily acquiesce in …

Federal Register 2.0: Public Participation In The Twenty-First Century, Lauren R. Dudley

Legislation and Policy Brief

On July 26, 2010, the Office of the Federal Register and the Government Printing Office (GPO) launched “Federal Register 2.0,” a web version of the daily Federal Register.  As of now, the site is only a prototype; therefore, “Federal Register 2.0” is not yet an official legal edition of the Federal Register, and it will not become official until the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting “Federal Register 2.0” official legal status.  Once “Federal Register 2.0” becomes official, the website will allow the public to receive notice of proposed agency regulations, link to a separate …

Order For The Courts: Reforming The Nollan/Dolan Threshold Inquiry For Exactions, Winfield B. Martin

Seattle University Law Review

For decades prior to 2005, Fifth Amendment regulatory takings jurisprudence languished in a state of confused neglect. Rather than articulating a clearly discernable standard for determining whether a violation of the Takings Clause had occurred, Justices rebuffed government action that seemed to amount to “an out-and-out plan of extortion” and nodded in approval when they deemed the government to have “acted diligently and in good faith” or in furtherance of a “compelling interest.” In trying to parse this imprecise thicket, scholars have characterized the Court’s approach to regulatory takings as a “muddle,” in “disarray,” and “incoherent.” Professor Kent even noted …