Exiting Litigation,
2010
Notre Dame Law School
Exiting Litigation, Jay Tidmarsh
Journal Articles
The American judicial system will face significant challenges in the twenty-first century. One of its immediate challenges is adapting the rules of civil procedure to the stresses under which the civil-justice system operates. Some of the most notable pressures arise from transnational litigation, mass litigation, proliferation of claims against governmental and corporate institutions, and competition from methods of alternative dispute resolution that promise to dispense cheaper, faster, and more satisfying justice.
The Supreme Court's Legislative Agenda To Free Government From Accountability For Constitutional Deprivations,
2010
Penn State Dickinson School of Law
The Supreme Court's Legislative Agenda To Free Government From Accountability For Constitutional Deprivations, Gary S. Gildin
Faculty Scholarship
In Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, the Supreme Court adopted a new standard of factual particularity a plaintiff must meet to satisfy the requirement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) that a complaint plead a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” In Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the Court made clear that the Twombly pleading standard extended to civil actions seeking redress for deprivation of constitutional rights in particular, and universally to all Complaints filed in federal court. Commentators have debated whether after Iqbal, victims of constitutional wrongdoing will be able to …
I Could Have Been A Contender: Summary Jury Trial As A Means To Overcome Iqbal's Negative Effects Upon Pre-Litigation Communication, Negotiation And Early, Consensual Dispute Resolution,
2010
Penn State Dickinson School of Law
I Could Have Been A Contender: Summary Jury Trial As A Means To Overcome Iqbal's Negative Effects Upon Pre-Litigation Communication, Negotiation And Early, Consensual Dispute Resolution, Nancy A. Welsh
Faculty Scholarship
With its recent decisions in Ashcroft v. Iqbal and Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, the Supreme Court may be intentionally or unintentionally “throwing the fight,” at least in the legal contests between many civil rights claimants and institutional defendants. The most obvious feared effect is reduction of civil rights claimants’ access to the expressive and coercive power of the courts. Less obviously, the Supreme Court may be effectively undermining institutions’ motivation to negotiate, mediate - or even communicate with and listen to - such claimants before they initiate legal action. Thus, the Supreme Court’s recent decisions have the potential to deprive …
Disputing Limited Liability,
2010
Washington University School of Law
Disputing Limited Liability, Christina L. Boyd, David A. Hoffman
Scholarship@WashULaw
This project presents six years of hand-collected federal district court data to analyze the first representative sample of veil piercing litigation. Our method identifies veil piercing complaints through Westlaw's trial pleadings database and codes each case through a detailed examination of PACER records. We test a variety of hypotheses to understand how such litigations are resolved. We find that plaintiffs succeed quite often in veil piercing litigation, if success is defined as winning on motions that do not terminate a case. A variety of legal and extra-legal factors predict such interstitial veil piercing successes. Voluntary creditor causes of action promote …
Multidistrict Litigation: A Surprising Bonus For Pro Se Plaintiffs And A Possible Boon For Consumers,
2010
Washington University in St. Louis School of Law
Multidistrict Litigation: A Surprising Bonus For Pro Se Plaintiffs And A Possible Boon For Consumers, Danielle D'Onfro
Scholarship@WashULaw
Conventional wisdom says that pro se plaintiffs almost invariably fare worse than represented plaintiffs. However, there exists in federal court a procedural regime under which pro se plaintiffs effectively receive attorneys and therefore experience success rates similar to their represented peers: multidistrict litigation. Multidistrict litigation is a procedure for consolidating multiple federal civil cases sharing common questions of fact into a single proceeding in one federal district court for coordinated pre-trial proceedings and discovery. This paper takes an empirical look at all federal civil cases terminating between 2006 and 2008 to determine what effect multidistrict litigation has on case outcome …
The Bankruptcy Hegemon: Section 524(A) And Its Effect On State And Federal Comity,
2010
Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
The Bankruptcy Hegemon: Section 524(A) And Its Effect On State And Federal Comity, Benjamin Margulis
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Is Ashcroft V. Iqbal The Death (Finally) Of The “Historical Test” For Interpreting The Seventh Amendment?,
2010
California Western School of Law
Is Ashcroft V. Iqbal The Death (Finally) Of The “Historical Test” For Interpreting The Seventh Amendment?, Kenneth S. Klein
Faculty Scholarship
There is the possibility that the recent Supreme Court decision of Ashcroft v. Iqbal finally will be the necessary impetus to revisit one of the more bizarre but enduring canards of American jurisprudence -- the way we interpret the Seventh Amendment's preservation of a right to a jury trial in federal civil litigation. The Seventh Amendment provides that "[i]n suits at common law ... the right of trial by jury shall be preserved." To this day, the way we apply the Seventh Amendment-in other words, what we interpret to be the constitutional intent and mandate of our Founders-is to postulate …
Kesalahan-Kesalahan Matrimoni Dalam Kes Perceraian Di Luar Mahkamah Dan Tanpa Kebenaran Mahkamah : Kajian Di Mahkamah Syariah Negeri Selangor Darul Ehsan.,
2010
University of Malaya
Kesalahan-Kesalahan Matrimoni Dalam Kes Perceraian Di Luar Mahkamah Dan Tanpa Kebenaran Mahkamah : Kajian Di Mahkamah Syariah Negeri Selangor Darul Ehsan., Mazlan Abd Manan
Student Works (2010-2019)
There is no specific nas (justification) provided in the Al-Quran and the Al-Sunnah with regards to divorce outside the Court without due permission. However, over the years this ongoing problem has led the scholars to view their justifications on the matter. In view of this, the purpose of this dissertation is to feature the study on divorce cases outside Court and without the Court’s permission and its implementation to Malaysian law specifically in reference to cases from the Syariah Courts in Selangor. The Selangor Islamic Family Law Enactment 1984 for instance, as proposed by the Syariah Court has come up …
Resolving Cases On The Merits,
2010
Notre Dame Law School
Resolving Cases On The Merits, Jay Tidmarsh
Journal Articles
Prepared for a Symposium on Civil Justice Reform, this essay examines the role of the “on the merits” principle in modern American procedure. After surveying the possible meanings of the phrase, the essay critiques its most common understanding due to its economic inefficiency and its lack of strong philosophical support. Relying on the recent work of Amartya Sen, the essay proposes that the principle be replaced with a “fair outcome” principle that melds both “procedural” and “substantive” concerns.
Nationwide Personal Jurisdiction For Our Federal Courts,
2010
William & Mary Law School
Nationwide Personal Jurisdiction For Our Federal Courts, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure limits the territorial jurisdiction of federal district courts to that of the courts of their host states.T his limitation is a voluntary rather than obligatory restriction, given district courts' status as courts of the national sovereign. Although there are sound policy reasons for limiting the jurisdictional reach of our federal courts in this manner, the limitation delivers little benefit from a judicial administration or even a fairness perspective, and ultimately costs more to implement than is gained in return. The rule should be amended to provide that district courts have personal …
Comparative Convergences In Pleading Standards,
2010
University of California Hastings College of Law
Comparative Convergences In Pleading Standards, Scott Dodson
Faculty Publications
Comparative civil procedure has had little influence in American jurisprudence and commentary, in part because of American procedure's deep and widespread exceptionalism. But this may be changing, at least in certain areas. The American notice pleading standard, for example, which has long been considered exceptional, shows signs of trending toward the fact pleading models of foreign countries. Congressional experimentation with heightened pleading in statutes such as the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act and the Supreme Court's recent pronouncements in Iqbal v. Ashcroft and Bell Atlantic v. Twombly suggest that American pleading jurisprudence is moving away from its traditionally exceptionalist corner …
Iqbal And Empathy,
2010
Duke Law School
Iqbal And Empathy, Darrell A. H. Miller
Faculty Scholarship
This Essay argues that empathy does and should play an important, albeit limited role, in a judge’s decision making process. Specifically, empathy is essential for making correct, principled, and unbiased judgments, because empathy is one of the few means we have to understand human motivation. Empathy is a crucial cognitive mechanism that can help compensate for common cognitive bias. As such, empathy, appropriately restricted, should be an accepted and meaningful tool for judges to use in evaluating the sufficiency of complaints, especially as they relate to Iqbal’s plausibility pleading standard.
Class Dismissed: Contemporary Judicial Hostility To Small-Claims Consumer Class Actions,
2010
Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
Class Dismissed: Contemporary Judicial Hostility To Small-Claims Consumer Class Actions, Myriam E. Gilles
Articles
I start from the view that small-value consumer claims are a primary reason that class actions exist, and that without class actions many - if not most - of the wrongs perpetrated upon small-claims consumers would not be capable of redress. It would then seem to follow that the class action device should be readily available in small-claims consumer cases. And yet, over the past decade, federal district courts have repeatedly declined to certify class actions on grounds that are specific to small-claims consumer cases. Foremost among those grounds is the notion that the federal class action rule carries within …
