Civil Procedure Commons^™

The Shifting Sands Of Cost Shifting, Andrew M. Pardieck

Cleveland State Law Review

The cost-shifting analysis employed by the federal courts in ruling on discovery disputes is flawed. There is tremendous variability in how courts interpret the factors guiding the analysis. There is tremendous variability in the information courts rely on in deciding whether to preclude the discovery or shift its costs. The result is waste for the litigants, courts, and society as a whole. This Article argues that there is a better way: mandate cooperation before cost shifting. The courts should condition proportionality and cost-shifting rulings on cooperation. The cooperation should be substantive: require disclosure of objective information about the disputed discovery …

Brief Of Complex Litigation Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Myriam E. Gilles

Amicus Briefs

The amici are law professors who teach and write in the field of federal civil procedure and complex litigation. Amici share an interest in presenting this Court with an impartial view on the function of the class action and its relationship to the law of Article III justiciability to inform the question presented in this case.

Tull V. United States: The Right To A Jury Trial In A Statutory Proceeding, John A. Kolanz

Journal of Natural Resources & Environmental Law

No abstract provided.

Preserving Issues For Appeal In Nevada's Federal Courts, Micah Echols, Tom Stewart

Nevada Law Journal Forum

Attorneys in federal courts across the country, including in the District of Nevada, are aware of the age-old rule that, generally, new issues cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. The question then becomes, how are these issues properly raised, and preserved, in the district court so that they are preserved for an appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit or, ultimately, the Supreme Court of the United States? This article provides guiding principles based upon federal case law and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to answer these questions on preserving error …

The Intervention Of The Court For Assistance In Obtaining Evidence And Temporary And Precautionary Measures During The Course Of The Arbitral Proceedings: A Comparative Analysis Between The Palestinian And Jordanian Law., Khaled I. Talahma Article

UAEU Law Journal

The role of the judiciary in supporting arbitration panels is a necessity required by the nature of functions performed by arbitration systems in the community, as well as the requirements of protecting the interests of arbitration parties. Due to the importance of this role, this study examines the supporting role of courts in securing evidence and taking temporary and provisional actions; matters which are outside the scope and authority of the arbitration panels. The study conducted a comparative analysis of the Palestinian and Jordanian laws to compare legislative organization of this role, and clarify legal gaps which may face a …

The Fall Of The Right To Take Action In Accordance With The Jordanian Code Of Civil Procedure, Abdul Rahman Jumaa

UAEU Law Journal

This research has focused on procedural lapse, which is a penalty that leads to the absolute withdrawal of the procedural right from the right-holder in case of non-use of this right within the time limit specified by law. It has been shown that all time limits specified to exercising a procedural right constitute a lapse of time, whereas the time limits specified to exercising a procedural obligation or to perform an obligation ordered by a judge within his/her capacity to manage the case before him/her are considered as pleading times. The times of lapse have been clarified. In addition to …

Reluctance Or Apathy? Examining Georgia’S Continued Adherence To A Strict Mutuality Issue Preclusion Doctrine, Boris W. Gautier

Georgia State University Law Review

The common law doctrine of issue preclusion, also known as collateral estoppel, prevents parties from relitigating an issue in subsequent lawsuits if a prior judgment already conclusively decided the issue. Issue preclusion traditionally required strict mutuality of parties; the first and second lawsuits had to involve the exact same litigants. Although the majority of jurisdictions now allow nonmutual issue preclusion, Georgia continues to enforce “identity of parties” as a necessary element of issue preclusion. Despite recently reaffirming this requirement, the Georgia Supreme Court has not thoroughly analyzed the merits of the rule.

This Note examines the evolution of issue preclusion …

Georgia’S Approach To Proportionality And Sanctions For The Spoliation Of Electronically Stored Information, Matthew Daigle

Georgia State University Law Review

The rapid evolution and implementation of technology in society has resulted in the increasing use of data as evidence in court. While the scope of discovery is limited by, among other things, the burden imposed on the producing party, the sheer magnitude of electronic evidence compared to its physical counterpart necessitates a different framework for evaluating such a burden. Without limiting factors, the discoverability of electronically stored information (ESI) exposes producing parties to liability disproportionate to the value of a case. While the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have evolved to address the discovery of ESI, the Georgia Civil Practice …

Preserving Issues For Appeal In The Nevada State District Courts Under Nevada's New 2019 Rules Of Civil Procedure, Micah Echols, Tom Stewart

Nevada Law Journal Forum

Practicing attorneys are aware of the age-old rule of appellate practice that new issues cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. But, how are these issues properly raised, and preserved, in the district courts so that they are preserved for an appeal before the Nevada Court of Appeals or the Nevada Supreme Court? This article provides guiding principles based upon Nevada case law and the newly-revised 2019 Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure to answer these questions on preserving error for an appeal in Nevada’s state courts.

The Forum-Defendant Rule, The Mischief Rule, And Snap Removal, Howard M. Wasserman

William & Mary Law Review Online

Samuel Bray’s The Mischief Rule reconceptualizes and revitalizes that venerable canon of statutory interpretation. Bray’s new approach to the mischief rule offers a textual solution to an ongoing civil procedure puzzle—forum defendants and “snap removal.” The forum-defendant rule provides that a diversity case is not removable from state to federal court when a properly joined and served defendant is a citizen of the forum state. Snap removal occurs whena defendant removes before the forum defendant has been properly served, “snapping” the case into federal court. Three courts of appeals and a majority of district courts have endorsed this practice, concluding …

The Theory Of Emergency Circumstances And Its Impact On Judicial Judgments: A Comparative Study., Dr. Yasser Bassem Al-Sabawi, Ruaa Khalil Ibrahim

UAEU Law Journal

Issuing a judicial judgment is considered to be the outcome which requires resting to court and bringing legal actions before them. If such an end is accomplished by the issuance of a judicial judgment, the next procedure shall be to execute what is included in this judgment in order for each person to achieve their right. However the circumstances accompanying such an execution may not be the same circumstances in the light of which the judicial judgment has been issued; rather they may change according to emergent events coming upon the judicial judgment after being issued, which in turn affect …

Towards A New Paradigm For E-Discovery In Civil Litigation: A Judicial Perspective, William Matthewman

Florida Law Review

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide the basic framework for production of discovery that is relevant and proportional to litigants’ claims and defenses. In the past, litigants and attorneys far too often used these rules to obstruct the discovery process rather than to facilitate it. This Old Discovery Paradigm used overbroad discovery requests, boilerplate discovery responses, dilatory behavior, and a lack of cooperation among opposing counsel. However, with the emergence of ever-expanding technologies using email, texts, and other forms of electronic communication, the modern legal system requires a New E-Discovery Paradigm to govern how litigants, their counsel, and judges …

Towards A New Role Of The Supreme Court As A Degree Of Litigation "The Supreme Court As Second Or Third Degree Of Litigation" "A Comparative Study" - Part (I), Prof. Mostafa El-Metwally Quandil

UAEU Law Journal

In principle, the Supreme Court must refer the reversed decision to the trial court for a new decision, because the role of the Supreme Court is to make a final determination on questions of law and not to hear a case. That being said, there is a recent tendency according to which the Supreme Court acts as a second or third degree court, competent to decide reviewed cases without referring to the trial court.

Towards A New Role Of The Supreme Court As A Degree Of Litigation "The Supreme Court As Second Or Third Degree Of Litigation" "A Comparative Study"- Part (Ii), Prof. Mostafa El-Metwally Quandil

UAEU Law Journal

In principle, the Court of Cassation refers the appealed judgment in which to transmit the merits of the case to the trial court (First Instance Court) to rule again, because its main role is to assess the legal provisions and not the subject of the disputes presented before it. However, this has been partially changed to the extent that it may be said that the Court of Cassation considered - in some cases and in some legislation – as second or third level of litigation; where - in this case - and then set aside the appealed judgment dismissal on …

Calf Boss Ribs V. Blackfeet Tribal Court, 20-Ap-03 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Feb. 16, 2021), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court dismissed a motion for reconsideration of a lower court decision when new evidence was discovered by the appellant. The Court noted that the evidence must be presented to the lower court. The Appellate Court of the Blackfeet Nation will not overturn the Tribal Court’s judgement based upon factual findings unless a review of the entire record shows that such judgement was not supported by substantial evidence. Motion for reconsideration is dismissed. The case was remanded to the lower court for a new hearing and the Court advised the lower court to …

Code Of Conduct For Judges: An Analytical And Critical Review, Yousef Shandi

UAEU Law Journal

The study tackled the code of conduct for judges in a number of States and international and regional documents, with particular emphasis on the Bangalore Principles, instruments of Riyadh and Sharjah and conduct rules in both France and Palestine. The researcher made a comparison amongst all these sources in order to form a comprehensive perception of all these rules in terms of nature, sources, purposes, and the sanctions resulting from their violation. The researcher also analyzed these rules in a detailed framework, focusing on the content of each principle or rule of conduct in both theory and practice.

The study …

Agency In The Dispute In Accordance With The Provisions Of The Jordanian Civil Laws, Abdul Rahman Jumaa

UAEU Law Journal

The lawyer’s Power of Attorney (POA) is a sort of contractual representation that authorizes a nominated lawyer by a litigant in legal procedures to act on behalf of him and to undertake all necessary actions or proceedings before the courts in legal suit. As a must for the POA includes expressly the powers of the attorney to be acted and to be done on behave of his grantor, such as: a waiver to challenge courts laws decisions and judgments, settlement, dropping a lawsuit, receive monies, addressing oath, declaration against interest, claiming the minatory interest, bringing claims, dismissing the judges .In …

Sonner V. Premier Nutrition Corp., Ruth Dapper, Bryce Young

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

When sitting in diversity jurisdiction, must a federal court apply federal equitable principles when deciding state law claims, even if state law may provide a different outcome? That was the question before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the case of Sonner v. Premier Nutrition Corp. Although the Ninth Circuit’s published opinion relies on “seventy-five years” of unchanged law, the opinion joins a long list of cases that continue to help clarify the tenets from Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins and inform the courts and practitioners on the relationship between state and federal authority …

The Authority Of The Court To Use The Most Practical Evidence In The Private International Law: A Comparative Study", Dr. Yasser Bassem Al-Sabawi, Khalil Ibrahim Mohammed

UAEU Law Journal

The importance of the theory of Evidence in presenting the dispute to the judiciary is evident, where the judge has to apply the rules of evidence. If the theory of Evidence is one of the most important and practical theories in the working life at the courts, it is the theory applied by the courts every day at the level of the internal laws. A right whose source can not be proven whether legal or legal fact, is worthless.

It is even more important when examining the issue of evidence in private international law, in particular the question of acceptance …

Shut Up And Pitch: Major League Baseball's Power Struggle With Minor League Players In Senne V. Kansas City Royals Baseball Corp., Bernadette Berger

Jeffrey S. Moorad Sports Law Journal (1994 - )

No abstract provided.