Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Civil Procedure Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

6,680 Full-Text Articles 5,089 Authors 7,087,678 Downloads 160 Institutions

All Articles in Civil Procedure

Faceted Search

6,680 full-text articles. Page 61 of 158.

Jural Entities, Real Parties In Controversy, And Representative Litigants: A Unified Approach To The Diversity Jurisdiction Requirements For Business Organizations, Charles A. Szypszak 2020 University of Maine School of Law

Jural Entities, Real Parties In Controversy, And Representative Litigants: A Unified Approach To The Diversity Jurisdiction Requirements For Business Organizations, Charles A. Szypszak

Maine Law Review

The rules that make the federal courts available for the resolution of controversies between citizens of different states have often been described as placing an undue burden on the federal system. Congress has for the most part turned a deaf ear to calls by jurists and commentators for reform or even abolition of federal diversity jurisdiction, leaving the courts to struggle with difficult issues about the proper contours of the jurisdictional requirements. One recurring difficult issue is the manner in which citizenship is to be attributed to the investors who compose various business organizations. The general rule has been that …


Vincent L. Mckusick And The Maine Rules Of Civil Procedure: A Thirty-Five Year Perspective, L. Kinvin Wroth 2020 University of Maine School of Law

Vincent L. Mckusick And The Maine Rules Of Civil Procedure: A Thirty-Five Year Perspective, L. Kinvin Wroth

Maine Law Review

The Editorial Board and Staff of Volume 43 of the Maine Law Review enthusiastically dedicate this issue to Vincent L. McKusick, Chief Justice of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court. Chief Justice McKusick took the oath of office on September 16, 1977, having been appointed the previous month by Governor James B. Longley, and will retire on February 28, 1992. As the following tributes make clear, the contributions he has made to the betterment of state and national legal institutions during his tenure evidence the same qualities of integrity and excellence that have been the hallmarks of his long and distinguished …


Jural Entities, Real Parties In Controversy, And Representative Litigants: A Unified Approach To The Diversity Jurisdiction Requirements For Business Organizations, Charles A. Szypszak 2020 University of Maine School of Law

Jural Entities, Real Parties In Controversy, And Representative Litigants: A Unified Approach To The Diversity Jurisdiction Requirements For Business Organizations, Charles A. Szypszak

Maine Law Review

The rules that make the federal courts available for the resolution of controversies between citizens of different states have often been described as placing an undue burden on the federal system. Congress has for the most part turned a deaf ear to calls by jurists and commentators for reform or even abolition of federal diversity jurisdiction, leaving the courts to struggle with difficult issues about the proper contours of the jurisdictional requirements. One recurring difficult issue is the manner in which citizenship is to be attributed to the investors who compose various business organizations. The general rule has been that …


Trial Handbook For Maine Lawyers, Joel C. Martin 2020 University of Maine School of Law

Trial Handbook For Maine Lawyers, Joel C. Martin

Maine Law Review

Lawyers Cooperative Publishing has issued trial handbooks for practitioners in some twenty-three states. One now appears for Maine lawyers, under the supervision of Bob Stolt of the Maine Bar. Trial Handbook for Maine Lawyers is a single-volume compendium of Maine precedent and practice as they relate to trials. Excluding the discovery matters that precede the trial and the appeal that may follow it, the book focuses on the actual conduct of the trial, from jury selection to verdict and judgment. In between, it covers the necessary matters: opening statements, the order and burden of proof, examination of witnesses, evidence, damages, …


Some Limits On The Judicial Power To Restrict Dissemination Of Discovery, Thomas C. Bradley 2020 University of Maine School of Law

Some Limits On The Judicial Power To Restrict Dissemination Of Discovery, Thomas C. Bradley

Maine Law Review

The pretrial process of discovery governed by Federal and Maine Rule of Civil Procedure 26 enables plaintiffs in product liability actions to delve where few people have delved before—into a corporation's internal memoranda, competitive practices, and secret product or design information as well as other less sensitive information in a company's possession. Discovery, in this context as in others, is a powerful tool determined by the courts to be necessary for the just litigation of claims. As a balance to the leeway given parties to compel production of information in discovery, federal and Maine courts have the authority under Federal …


Emergency Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus, Injunctive, And Declaratory Relief - Class Action, Joseph Mead, David J. Carey, Mark A. Vander Laan, Freda Levenson, David Singleton 2020 Cleveland State University

Emergency Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus, Injunctive, And Declaratory Relief - Class Action, Joseph Mead, David J. Carey, Mark A. Vander Laan, Freda Levenson, David Singleton

Law Faculty Briefs and Court Documents

As a tragic combination of infectious and deadly, COVID-19 poses a once-in-a-lifetime threat on a worldwide scale. Every state and territory in the United States has now been impacted, with nearly half a million cases and over 20,000 deaths reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Even under ordinary conditions, each person who contracts this illness can be expected to infect between 2 and 3 others.

Cramped, overcrowded prisons amplify this threat. With thousands of people literally stacked on top of each other and unable to move around without rubbing shoulders, such environments are fundamentally incompatible with …


Please Remain Standing: Using Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(D) Supplemental Pleading To Cure Defects In Standing, Carson Miller 2020 University of Cincinnati College of Law

Please Remain Standing: Using Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(D) Supplemental Pleading To Cure Defects In Standing, Carson Miller

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.


Modern-Day Witch Hunts: How The Mental Health Industry Abuses Patients And The Judiciary While Committing Fraud, Joan L. Roberts Mrs. 2020 Northern Michigan University

Modern-Day Witch Hunts: How The Mental Health Industry Abuses Patients And The Judiciary While Committing Fraud, Joan L. Roberts Mrs.

Conspectus Borealis

No abstract provided.


Jaramillo V. Ramos, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 17 (Apr. 2, 2020), Jose Tafoya 2020 University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law

Jaramillo V. Ramos, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 17 (Apr. 2, 2020), Jose Tafoya

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court found a plaintiff is not required to provide expert testimony to survive a defendant’s summary judgment motion when the plaintiff is relying on the res ipsa loquitur statute’s prima facie case of negligence. Rather, plaintiff must only establish facts that entitle it to a rebuttable presumption of negligence under Nevada’s res ipsa loquitur statute. Whether a defendant can rebut the presumption through their own expert testimony or evidence is a question of fact for the jury.


Reynolds V. Tufenkjian, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 19 (Apr. 9, 2020), Brittni Tanenbaum 2020 University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law

Reynolds V. Tufenkjian, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 19 (Apr. 9, 2020), Brittni Tanenbaum

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered whether a party who purchased a judgment debtor’s rights of action could motion the Court to substitute themselves in as the real party in interest and dismiss the appeal. The Court held that only “things in action” that are otherwise assignable may be subject to execution to satisfy a judgment. The Court concluded that tort claims for personal injury—including fraud/intentional misrepresentation and elder exploitation—are generally not assignable. The Court further concluded that tort claims for injury to property and contract-based claims, unless the claims are personal in nature, are generally assignable. Therefore, the Court granted the respondents’ …


Associations And Cities As (Forbidden) Pure Private Attorneys General, Heather Elliott 2020 William & Mary Law School

Associations And Cities As (Forbidden) Pure Private Attorneys General, Heather Elliott

William & Mary Law Review

The Supreme Court interprets Article III’s case-or-controversy language to require a plaintiff to show injury in fact, causation, and redressability. A plaintiff who meets that tripartite test has standing to sue and thus a personal stake in pursuing the litigation. Accordingly, in Sierra Club v. Morton, the Supreme Court prohibited pure private attorneys general: litigants who would sue without the requisite personal stake. This limitation extends to organizations. They, too, must show standing on their own account or, under Hunt v. Washington Apple Advertising Commission, identify a member with Article III standing and show how the lawsuit is germane to …


Navigating The Discovery Chess Match Through Effective Case Management, Philip Favro 2020 The University of Akron

Navigating The Discovery Chess Match Through Effective Case Management, Philip Favro

Akron Law Review

The challenges with civil discovery are often overwhelming. At times, counsel may feel powerless to avoid discovery quagmires and the resulting costs and delays. Nevertheless, counsel can guide a matter through these complexities if they learn how to better manage the discovery process. In Navigating the Discovery Chess Match through Effective Case Management, I expound on three methods that can facilitate case management in discovery.

The first emphasizes the benefits of proportionality in resolving preservation disputes over electronic data. The next involves providing early and more fulsome initial disclosures to enhance the FRCP 26(f) discovery conference. The final method focuses …


The Parable Of The Forms, Samuel L. Bray 2020 St. John's University School of Law

The Parable Of The Forms, Samuel L. Bray

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

It might be good for each department to have its own form, or it might be better to have one form for the whole campus. That is an open question. It depends on how different the repair requests are in different departments, and on the value of specialization. It depends on whether we want some complexity about the choice of forms or if we want radical simplicity about the number of forms, with all of the complexity residing within a single form.

So, too, it might be good to have different forms of action. That way, everyone knows upfront …


Supervisors Without Supervision: Colon, Mckenna, And The Confusing State Of Supervisory Liability In The Second Circuit, Ryan E. Johnson 2020 Washington and Lee University School of Law

Supervisors Without Supervision: Colon, Mckenna, And The Confusing State Of Supervisory Liability In The Second Circuit, Ryan E. Johnson

Washington and Lee Law Review

This Note received the 2019 Washington and Lee Law Council Law Review Award.

This Note analyzes two intra-Second Circuit splits that make it nearly impossible for prisoners to recover against supervisors under § 1983. First, district courts in the Second Circuit are divided as to whether the five categories of personal involvement defined in Colon v. Coughlin survive the Supreme Court’s decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal. Personal involvement by the supervisory defendant is a necessary element to impose supervisory liability. Some district courts hold that only the first and third Colon factors survive Iqbal, while others hold that all …


Personal Jurisdiction And National Sovereignty, Ray Worthy Campbell 2020 Peking University School of Transnational Law

Personal Jurisdiction And National Sovereignty, Ray Worthy Campbell

Washington and Lee Law Review

State sovereignty, once seemingly sidelined in personal jurisdiction analysis, has returned with a vengeance. Driven by the idea that states must not offend rival states in their jurisdictional reach, some justices have looked for specific targeting of individual states as individual states by the defendant in order to justify an assertion of personal jurisdiction. To allow cases to proceed based on national targeting alone, they argue, would diminish the sovereignty of any state that the defendant had specifically targeted.

This Article looks for the first time at how this emphasis on state sovereignty limits national sovereignty, especially where alien defendants …


Horseshoes And Hand Grenades: Frank V.Gaos And The Problem With Class Action Cy Pres Distributions, Jorge Galavis 2020 University of Miami Law School

Horseshoes And Hand Grenades: Frank V.Gaos And The Problem With Class Action Cy Pres Distributions, Jorge Galavis

University of Miami Business Law Review

Nearly Just

Frank v. Gaos is a case that weighed the merits of cy pres, a pesky complex doctrine left applied to my dismay. When in class action settlements, there are remaining funds, Defendants seem to benefit from what the Plaintiffs won.

Worse still the doctrine is applied in cases such as this; when direct payments to a class are deemed de minimus. Counsel decided class members were fine with what they got, Then phoned their favorite charities to divvy the whole pot.

Once courts agree that’s close enough to benefit the class, They seem to turn a blind eye …


In Re Government Attorney-Client Privilege: A Categorical Rule To Settle The Issue, Luke Charette 2020 Washington and Lee University School of Law

In Re Government Attorney-Client Privilege: A Categorical Rule To Settle The Issue, Luke Charette

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

This Note explores the reasoning and factors used by each of the federal circuits in deciding whether or not to uphold attorney-client privilege between the government and the lawyers representing it. After considering those factors, this Note argues that there should be a categorical rule that neither a state nor the federal government may invoke the attorney-client privilege in response to a criminal grand jury subpoena. To justify this conclusion, this Note outlines how current government attorney-client privilege case law, as well as the policy underpinnings of the privilege itself, dictate that a categorical rule is appropriate.


The Story Of A Class: Uses Of Narrative In Public Interest Class Actions Before Certification, Anne E. Ralph 2020 The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law

The Story Of A Class: Uses Of Narrative In Public Interest Class Actions Before Certification, Anne E. Ralph

Washington Law Review

When litigants in public interest class actions tell their stories, the narratives can advance the law and influence public debate. But before class members’ stories can vindicate civil rights on the merits, plaintiffs must overcome the hurdle of class certification.

For decades, obtaining class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 was not a significant challenge for plaintiffs seeking to litigate as a class. But recent restrictive procedural developments—including heightened standards for class certification—threaten the powerful stories that can be told through public interest class actions.

Missing in the critical analysis of class action jurisprudence is any discussion of …


Berberich V. Bank Of America, 136 Nev. Ad. Op (Mar. 26, 2020), Amelia Mallette 2020 University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law

Berberich V. Bank Of America, 136 Nev. Ad. Op (Mar. 26, 2020), Amelia Mallette

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Supreme Court of Nevada considered whether a quiet title action from a foreclosure sale was barred by NRS 11.080 because Berberich was in possession of the property for five years before commencing the action. The Court held that the limitations period outlined in NRS 11.080 will not run against an owner who is in undisputed possession of the land.


Deciding, ‘What Happened?’ When We Don’T Really Know: Finding Theoretical Grounding For Legitimate Judicial Fact-Finding, Nayha Acharya 2020 Dalhousie University Schulich School of Law

Deciding, ‘What Happened?’ When We Don’T Really Know: Finding Theoretical Grounding For Legitimate Judicial Fact-Finding, Nayha Acharya

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The crucial question for many legal disputes is “what happened,”? and there is often no easy answer. Fact-finding is an uncertain endeavor and risk of inaccuracy is inevitable. As such, I ask, on what basis can we accept the legitimacy of judicial fact-findings. I conclude that acceptable factual determinations depend on adherence to a legitimate process of fact-finding. Adopting Jürgen Habermas’s insights, I offer a theoretical grounding for the acceptability of judicial fact-finding. The theory holds that legal processes must embody respect for legal subjects as equal and autonomous agents. This necessitates two procedural features. First, fact-finding processes must be …


Digital Commons powered by bepress