Civil Procedure Commons^™

Notice Pleading In Exile, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

According to the conventional wisdom, the Supreme Court's 2009 decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal discarded notice pleading in favor of plausibility pleading. This Article — part of a symposium commemorating the Iqbal decision's tenth anniversary — highlights decisions during those ten years that have continued to endorse notice pleading despite Iqbal. It also argues that those decisions reflect the best way to read the Iqbal decision. Although Iqbal is a troubling decision in many respects, it can be implemented consistently with the notice-pleading framework that the original drafters of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure had in mind.

Putting The Notice Back Into Pleading, Robin Effron

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Janus-Faced Rulemaking, Brooke Coleman

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

2020 Mlk Keynote Address: Michelle Alexander Presentation, Center For Social Equity & Inclusion, Michelle Alexander, Rosanne Somerson, Matthew Shenoda

Martin Luther King, Jr. Series

2020 MLK Series Keynote Michelle Alexander brings audiences profoundly necessary and meaningful insights on the practice of mass incarceration that plagues the US justice system, as well as eye-opening conversation on how we can end racial caste in America. Lecture Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 5:30pm, RISD Auditorium, 17 Canal Walk, Providence, RI.

In her acclaimed bestseller The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, Alexander peels back the curtain on systemic racism in the US prison system in a work that the New York Review of Books describes as "striking in the intelligence of her …

The Constitutionality Of Nationwide Injunctions, Alan M. Trammell

Scholarly Articles

Opponents of nationwide injunctions have advanced cogent reasons why courts should be skeptical of this sweeping remedy, but one of the arguments is a red herring: the constitutional objection. This Essay focuses on the narrow question of whether the Article III judicial power prohibits nationwide injunctions. It doesn’t.

This Essay confronts and dispels the two most plausible arguments that nationwide injunctions run afoul of Article III. First, it shows that standing jurisprudence does not actually speak to the scope-of-remedy questions that nationwide injunctions present. Second, it demonstrates that the Article III judicial power is not narrowly defined in terms of …

Institutional Loyalty And The Design Of Partisan Gerrymandering Adjudication In The Federal Courts, Michael E. Solimine

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In 2019 the Supreme Court held in Rucho v. Common Cause that challenges in federal court to partisan gerrymandering were nonjusticiable political questions. Writing for the 5-4 majority, Chief Justice John Roberts expressed concern that frequently deciding such cases would politicize the Court itself. Such expressions seem to fit well within the characterization of the Chief Justice as an institutionalist concerned with the legitimacy and reputation of the federal courts. This article addresses how the unique design and procedures of gerrymandering litigation in federal courts ought to inform such institutional loyalty arguments. Those features include that such cases are litigated …

A New State Registration Act: Legislating A Longer Arm For Personal Jurisdiction, Charles W. (Rocky) Rhodes, Cassandra Burke Robertson

Faculty Publications

In a sextet of recent decisions, the Roberts Court upended the longstanding framework for general and specific contacts-based personal jurisdiction. The Court's new approach has engendered uncertainty and erected insurmountable obstacles for some plaintiffs in locating an effective forum to vindicate their rights. We propose a novel solution to the injustices and unpredictability unleashed by these decisions: a new model corporate registration act that would require, as a condition of doing business in a state, the corporation's consent to personal jurisdiction in defined circumstances that implicate state sovereign regulatory, protective, and prescriptive interests.

Registration-based consent to jurisdiction has a long …

Preserving The Nationwide National Government Injunction To Stop Illegal Executive Branch Activity, Doug Rendleman

Scholarly Articles

The Trump Administration’s extravagant claims of executive power have focused the federal courts’ attention on separation of powers, judicial review, and equitable jurisdiction to grant broad injunctions that forbid the administration’s violations of the Constitution and federal statutes. Critics question the federal courts’ power to grant broad injunctions that are effective everywhere. These critics maintain, among other things, that the federal courts lack jurisdiction and that broad injunctions improperly affect nonparties and militate against “percolation” of issues in a variety of courts.

This Article examines the critics’ arguments and finds them unconvincing. Accepting the critics’ arguments would rebalance the separation …

Standing In Between Sexual Violence Victims And Access To Justice: The Limits Of Title Ix, Hannah Brenner Johnson

Faculty Scholarship

Sexual violence proliferates across communities, generally, and is especially prevalent in places like colleges and universities. As quasi-closed systems, colleges and universities are governed by their own internal norms, policies, and federal laws, like Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which address how sex discrimination must be handled in institutions of higher education that are in receipt of federal funds. Title IX focuses on all facets of sex discrimination including reporting, investigation, adjudication, and prevention. When schools are accused of failing to adequately respond to reports of sexual misconduct on their campuses, Title IX has been interpreted by …

Rethinking The Conflicts Revolution In Personal Jurisdiction, Jesse M. Cross

Faculty Publications

It is widely acknowledged that, from roughly 1940 to 1970, a revolution occurred in Conflicts of Law. Referred to as the “Conflicts revolution,” this movement remade nearly every legal test in the field. According to conventional wisdom, this revolution rejected the same idea in each instance: namely, that Conflicts tests should be grounded in a theory of sovereignty. Instead, the argument goes, it pivoted the field to pragmatic tests that focus on practicality, fairness, and convenience.

As this Article explains, this conventional wisdom is incorrect. It misunderstands the intellectual revolution that remade the field, and it has generated needless confusion …

Halliburton Ii At Four: Has It Changed The Outcome Of Class Certification Decisions?, Noah Weingarten

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., 573 U.S. 258 (2014) (Halliburton II) appeared to give corporate defendants a new tool to defeat class certification in the context of securities fraud class action litigation: rebutting the requisite presumption of reliance by showing a lack of "price impact"-a term that Halliburton II used to describe whether the price of an allegedly affected company's stock went up or down. However, based on an empirical study of pre- versus post-Halliburton II class certification decisions, it appears that the outcomes of class certification decisions have become even …

Stepping Into The Shoes Of The Department Of Justice: The Unusual, Necessary, And Hopeful Path The Illinois Attorney General Took To Require Police Reform In Chicago, Lisa Madigan, Cara Hendrickson, Karyn L. Bass Ehler

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

No abstract provided.

Snap Removal: Concept; Cause; Cacophony; And Cure, Jeffrey W. Stempel, Thomas O. Main, David Mcclure

Scholarly Works

So-called “snap removal” – removal of a case from state to federal court prior to service on a forum state defendant – has divided federal trial courts for 20 years. Recently, panels of the Second, Third and Fifth Circuits have sided with those supporting the tactic even though it conflicts with the general prohibition on removal when the case includes a forum state defendant, a situation historically viewed as eliminating the need to protect the outsider defendant from possible state court hostility.

Consistent with the public policy underlying diversity jurisdiction – availability of a federal forum to protect against defending …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Civil Procedure And Economic Inequality, Maureen Carroll

Articles

How well do procedural doctrines attend to present-day economic inequality? This Essay examines that question through the lens of three doctrinal areas: the “irreparable harm” prong of the preliminary injunction standard, the requirement that discovery must be proportional to the needs of the case, and the due process rights of class members in actions for injunctive relief. It concludes that in each of those areas, courts and commentators could do more to take economic inequality into account.

The West Caribbean Conundrum: The United States Versus France On The Availability Of Forum Non Conveniens Under The Montreal Convention Of 1999, David Cluxton

Journal of Air Law and Commerce

No abstract provided.

Garza V. Idaho: Prioritizing Client Autonomy In Criminal Appeals Regardless Of An Appeal Waiver, Jackie Mcdonnell

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

In Garza v. Idaho, the Supreme Court resolved a split in authority about whether courts should presume counsel prejudiced a criminal defendant’s case when counsel failed to file a notice of appeal, holding the presumption of prejudice applies regardless of a defendant’s appeal waiver. By correctly extending Roe v. Flores-Ortega’s rule which requires courts to presume prejudice, the Court expanded the presumption’s application for ineffective assistance of counsel claims under the Sixth Amendment.

Overall, Garza protected a defendant’s right to appeal despite an appeal waiver, as counsel must now act on the defendant’s appeal request. If counsel fails to file …

Resolving The Circuit Split: Pleading Healthcare Fraud With Particularity, Tricia L. Forte

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Contracting For Confidential Discovery, Seth Katsuya Endo

UF Law Faculty Publications

One way that courts have adapted to the age of the internet is to provide nearly instant online access to their dockets. But many important filings remain shielded from public view as courts regularly issue stipulated protective orders at the request of the parties. And, while the costs and benefits of confidential discovery have been extensively discussed in the academic literature, several important contextual developments — including the continuing growth of electronically stored information — prompt a reexamination. Additionally, easily searchable federal dockets now provide a window into what is happening in actual practice.

Taking up this task, Contracting for …

Improving Taiwan's Civil Procedure By Citizen Participation: Focusing On Expert Testimony In Public Interest Cases, Yin-Song Hsu

Maurer Theses and Dissertations

“The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience.”

United States Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr's famous quotation adequately explains the institutional purpose of citizen participation in important trials. Court decisions require both logical reasoning and a practical adherence to the reality of citizens’ experiences. Currently, the Taiwanese public believes that judicial decisions are often not in line with national perceptions of law. In addition, judges’ limited social experiences often cause the public to distrust their verdicts. The life experiences of citizens can properly fill in the gaps in judicial knowledge and supplement the …