State Courts' Interest In Federal Rulemaking: A Proposal For Recognition,
2024
University of Maine School of Law
State Courts' Interest In Federal Rulemaking: A Proposal For Recognition, Vincent L. Mckusick
Maine Law Review
As we approach the half-century anniversary of the adoption of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, we should take stock of the extent that they have served as a model for state rulemaking. At least thirty states, plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, now have civil rules substantially identical to the federal rules. Of the remaining states, only three have statutes or rules of civil procedure that bear little or no resemblance to the federal model Even those states such as Illinois, Michigan, New York, and Pennsylvania that have not modeled their civil procedure generally on the federal …
Ouellette V. Sturm, Ruger & Co. And Jones V. North American Aerodynamics: The Effectiveness Of Maine's Borrowing Statute In Cases Involving Corporations,
2024
University of Maine School of Law
Ouellette V. Sturm, Ruger & Co. And Jones V. North American Aerodynamics: The Effectiveness Of Maine's Borrowing Statute In Cases Involving Corporations, J. Gordon Scannell Jr.
Maine Law Review
Maine's borrowing statute provides that a person may not bring an action in Maine that has been barred by the laws of another jurisdiction wherein all parties resided. In effect, the statute permits "borrowing" the limitation period of the other jurisdiction. In Ouellette v. Sturm, Ruger & Co., the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, interpreted the residency requirement of the borrowing statute as it relates to a corporation and held that for purposes of the statute a corporation is a resident of only the state in which it is incorporated. Because of the peculiar wording of …
United States Ex Rel. Arrow Electronics, Inc. V. G.H. Coffey Co.: Judicial Interpretation Of Timely Notice Under Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 15(C),
2024
University of Maine School of Law
United States Ex Rel. Arrow Electronics, Inc. V. G.H. Coffey Co.: Judicial Interpretation Of Timely Notice Under Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 15(C), Brett Dwight Baber
Maine Law Review
In 1966, the United States Supreme Court amended Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c) to eliminate lower court confusion regarding "relation back" of pleading amendments which sought to change the party against whom the claim was asserted. The Rule, as presently formulated, permits a plaintiff to add or change a party defendant after the statute of limitations has run provided that . . . . While the current Rule is more precise than the pre-1966 Rule in defining when "relation back" is permissible, it has not eliminated the sharp divergence among judicial opinion regarding the proper application of the Rule. …
Restraining The Prosecutor: Restrictions On Threatening Prosecution For Civil Ends,
2024
University of Maine School of Law
Restraining The Prosecutor: Restrictions On Threatening Prosecution For Civil Ends, James A. Trowbridge
Maine Law Review
Prosecutors in some cases agree to dismiss criminal charges, admit a defendant to a diversion program, or enter a nolle prosequi in exchange for the defendant signing a waiver of any civil claims against law enforcement agents, governments, or private persons. The practice of a prosecutor bargaining for the release of law enforcement personnel or others from civil liability raises serious questions concerning the independence of the prosecutorial function, the relationship of prosecutors to other legal institutions, and the application of rules of professional responsibility. Generally, courts have been critical of these arrangements. The Model Code of Professional Responsibility (Code) …
Tuttle V. Raymond: Drawing The Line On Punitive Damages,
2024
Univeristy of Maine School of Law
Tuttle V. Raymond: Drawing The Line On Punitive Damages, Elting H. Smith
Maine Law Review
In Tuttle v. Raymond, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, reconsidered the appropriateness of Maine's common law doctrine of punitive damages. Under the doctrine, punitive or exemplary awards are permitted in tort actions, at the factfinder's discretion, for the purpose of deterring wrongful conduct. Prior to Tuttle, a plaintiff raised a claim for such an award if he proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant was guilty of intentional, wanton, malicious, reckless, or grossly negligent behavior. Because of the doctrine's uncertain justification and vague standards, however, punitive damages had become the subject of …
Beyond The Equity Power Of Bankruptcy Courts: Toxic Tort Liabilities In Chapter 11 Cases,
2024
Univeristy of Maine School of Law
Beyond The Equity Power Of Bankruptcy Courts: Toxic Tort Liabilities In Chapter 11 Cases, Kaighn Smith
Maine Law Review
In 1982, three asbestos product manufacturers filed voluntary petitions for business reorganization under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. The common reason for each of these filings was that tort liabilities threatened the financial survival of the corporation. Never, in the history of United States bankruptcy law, had any business sought bankruptcy relief for such a reason. By 1985, two more firms, another asbestos product manufacturer and a pharmaceutical company, filed Chapter 11 petitions for the same reason. The torts of these "debtors" in bankruptcy are similar; they extend from the manufacture and wide-spread marketing of products that …
Affirmative Judicial Case Management: A Viable Solution To The Toxic Product Litigation Crisis,
2024
Univeristy of Maine School of Law
Affirmative Judicial Case Management: A Viable Solution To The Toxic Product Litigation Crisis, Patrick Francis Harrigan
Maine Law Review
With increasing frequency, federal courts throughout the nation have confronted a multiplicity of "toxic tort" claims, claims for relief arising from chronic and latent illnesses or diseases allegedly caused by toxic substances. Toxic substances are substances whose manufacture, processing, distribution, use, or disposal presents or will present an unreasonable risk of injury to a person's health or to the environment. Because many of these unreasonable health risks are caused by consumer and industrial products, many toxic tort claims are actually "toxic product" claims. Examples of toxic product claims include those arising from the use, exposure to, or consumption of chemicals …
Interstate Commerce And Personal Jurisdiction In Flux: A Critical Analysis Of Mallory V. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. And Its Effects On Business Litigation,
2024
Florida A&M University College of Law
Interstate Commerce And Personal Jurisdiction In Flux: A Critical Analysis Of Mallory V. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. And Its Effects On Business Litigation, Mairi Cooley
University of Miami Business Law Review
This Note examines the implications of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., advocating for legislative intervention by Congress to mitigate its adverse effects on interstate commerce. The Court revived a pre-International Shoe v. Washingtonprecedent, validating a Pennsylvania statute that imposes general personal jurisdiction on non-resident businesses registered in the state. Justice Gorsuch’s majority opinion, supported by a diverse coalition of Justices, underscored the constitutionality of the statute under the Due Process Clause, with Justice Jackson emphasizing the principle of jurisdictional waiver via business registration. Conversely, Justice Alito’s concurrence, while agreeing on …
Not-So-Special Solicitude,
2024
Texas A&M University School of Law
Not-So-Special Solicitude, Katherine Mims Crocker
Faculty Scholarship
In a high-profile case last term about state standing to sue in federal court, Justice Gorsuch deemed it “hard not to wonder why” the majority said “nothing about ‘special solicitude.’” The silence was indeed surprising, for in a landmark decision several years earlier, the Supreme Court had declared that states were “entitled to special solicitude”—presumably meaning some sort of preferential treatment—“in [the] standing analysis.” And since then, commentators had depicted the concept as permitting opportunistic states to wage ideological crusades in courts across the country, especially through administrative-law attacks on federal-government defendants.
But what if “special solicitude” is not so …
The Grapes Of Roth,
2024
Marquette University Law School
The Grapes Of Roth, Bruce E. Boyden
Washington Law Review
Shortly after Roth Greeting Cards was decided in 1970, its offhand reference to the “total concept and feel” of the cards at issue became the dominant standard in copyright law for determining whether two works were substantially similar. That is a remarkable achievement for a phrase that, in the words of the influential Nimmer treatise, “threatens to subvert the very essence of copyright.” It nevertheless had enormous appeal for federal judges, and the reason extends well beyond copyright law. “Total concept and feel” appeared at a critical juncture for the federal judiciary, as an older model of decision-making, based on …
Plausibly Illiberal: Sua Sponte Dismissals Of Pro Se Complaints Under The Prison Litigation Reform Act,
2024
Fordham University School of Law
Plausibly Illiberal: Sua Sponte Dismissals Of Pro Se Complaints Under The Prison Litigation Reform Act, Pierce Edlich
Fordham Law Review
Over a quarter of civil litigants file suit in federal court without an attorney. Most unrepresented litigants are in prison, and many of their cases raise complex, delicate constitutional questions. The number of unrepresented litigants in federal courts rose steadily until the 1990s, when Congress passed the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) of 1995 to limit the burden of frivolous inmate litigation on federal courts. Since 1996, the PLRA has defined courts’ procedural obligations for inmate and in forma pauperis (IFP) suits, often filed pro se. The PLRA requires that courts screen and dismiss sua sponte cases that are frivolous, …
Egbert V. Boule And The Dwindling Bivens Doctrine,
2024
Mississippi Christian University School of Law
Egbert V. Boule And The Dwindling Bivens Doctrine, Luke Smith
MC Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Fundamental Failing: The Mississippi Judiciary's Abrogation Of Its Constitutional Duty,
2024
Mississippi Christian University School of Law
A Fundamental Failing: The Mississippi Judiciary's Abrogation Of Its Constitutional Duty, Brad Robertson
MC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Law, Fact, And Appellate Review,
2024
Texas A&M University School of Law
Law, Fact, And Appellate Review, Adam N. Steinman
Faculty Scholarship
For centuries, courts have been called upon to distinguish between law and fact. That distinction played a key role in recent Supreme Court decisions on two critical components of appellate review. Dupree v. Younger considered an important question regarding what a party must do at trial to preserve an issue for appellate review. And Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. addressed how to select and apply the standard of appellate review--specifically, whether and how the appellate court must show deference to particular decisions made at the trial level.
Both decisions were partially right. Dupree correctly focused on whether certain early …
A Take On "Special Solicitude" In State Standing: Reconciling The Unreconcilable,
2024
University of Cincinnati College of Law
A Take On "Special Solicitude" In State Standing: Reconciling The Unreconcilable, Audrey M. Woodward
University of Cincinnati Law Review
No abstract provided.
Leveling The Playing Field For Racial Justice In The Civil Litigation System,
2024
Washington and Lee University School of Law
Leveling The Playing Field For Racial Justice In The Civil Litigation System, Suzette M. Malveaux
Scholarly Articles
Under the weight of the #MeToo movement and severe public pressure, Congress stopped this unseemly practice for a subset of Americans—those challenging sexual assault and harassment. The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (EFASASHA), passed in 2022, gives these victims a choice of whether to challenge sexual misconduct in court or in arbitration. Such ubiquitous take-it-or-leave-it contracts are now unenforceable, giving this narrow swath of the population the power to decide for themselves how to challenge such outrageous wrongdoing. In Expanding the Ban on Forced Arbitration, Michael Z. Green argues that race discrimination claims should …
A Defendant's Right To Counsel In Commitment Hearings For Nonpayment Of A Criminal Fine,
2024
University of Maine School of Law
A Defendant's Right To Counsel In Commitment Hearings For Nonpayment Of A Criminal Fine, Barbara A. Appleby
Maine Law Review
The federal constitutional right of an indigent defendant to appointed counsel in state court proceedings derives from two constitutional provisions. First, the sixth amendment, as incorporated by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment, provides the basis for an absolute right to counsel in criminal prosecutions leading to actual imprisonment. Second, the due process clause, as an independent source of individual rights, provides the basis for the right to counsel in civil proceedings. Both the sixth amendment and the due process rights may be implicated in a hearing for non-payment of a criminal fine. Title 17-A, section 1304 of …
Maine Debtor-Creditor Law By Dennis M. Patterson,
2024
University of Maine School of Law
Maine Debtor-Creditor Law By Dennis M. Patterson, David J. Jones
Maine Law Review
Dennis M. Patterson, Esquire, has written a brief, practical guide to selected areas of collection practice entitled Maine Debtor-Creditor Law. Two immediate observations come to mind: first, that I plan to keep a copy of the book in my office library for future reference; second, that I am disappointed that the author omitted reference to several challenging issues that confront the attorney having a regular collection or foreclosure practice. This latter observation is both an indication of the usefulness of the book's treatment of the areas covered and a hopeful invitation to the author to expand on his subject matter …
Maine Civil Remedies By Andrew M. Horton & Peggy L. Mcgehee,
2024
University of Maine School of Law
Maine Civil Remedies By Andrew M. Horton & Peggy L. Mcgehee, Eric R. Herlan
Maine Law Review
If there is any ongoing dispute within the legal community that one could properly characterize as a Great Debate, that dispute concerns the nature and sources of judicial power. Most recently that debate has manifested itself in nuanced and subtle disagreements about how a court ought to interpret enacted law, whether found in statutes or written constitutions. That argument about judicial interpretation, and more precisely about the philosophical possibility of correct textual interpretations, is itself simply a more scholarly manifestation of an earlier dispute over whether judges should "legislate" when they resolve difficult legal issues, or should instead constrain themselves …
Taxpayer Standing And The Preventive-Remedial Distinction: A Call For Reform,
2024
University of Maine School of Law
Taxpayer Standing And The Preventive-Remedial Distinction: A Call For Reform, Alicia E. Flaherty
Maine Law Review
The Maine Law Court has observed that, "a central function of American courts [is] to protect and relieve the individual from injurious unconstitutional conduct by government officials." Apart from the political process, the judicial process is the only means through which citizens can ensure that government conforms to the law. The courts provide a forum for citizens to challenge the legality of official acts, and serve as a "means of correcting illegal practices of government officials which would otherwise be irreparable." The question of standing is a critical element of the court's task of balancing the individual's right to challenge …
