Civil Procedure Commons^™

Much Ado About Misjoinder: An Alternative To Fraudulent Misjoinder To Preserve Defendants’ Right To Removal In Pharmaceutical And Medical Device Products Liability Cases, Alexander Flaum

Cardozo Law Review

Unresolved questions surrounding the contours of the fraudulent misjoinder doctrine have understandably led to reluctance by courts to adopt it, despite its utility in protecting defendants’ access to federal court. This is particularly troubling in the context of pharmaceutical and medical device products liability cases. It is common in these actions for plaintiffs, whose only connection is having consumed a particular pharmaceutical product at different points in time and for different durations, to strategically join in one action to defeat complete diversity and prevent removal to federal court. However, federal courts are not powerless to prevent such procedural gamesmanship. By …

Welfare Litigation, State Courts, And Social Citizenship, Andrew Hammond

Articles by Maurer Faculty

For half a century, federal courts have stood at the center of welfare rights enforcement. That era is ending. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act’s historic cuts to Medicaid and SNAP will generate an avalanche of benefit terminations, work requirement sanctions, and overpayment actions from state agencies. And with a federal judiciary increasingly hostile to the private enforcement of public law, state courts will become not just a concurrent forum for welfare litigation, but an increasingly important one. Understanding how state courts have handled welfare litigation over the past three decades, then, is essential to anticipating what comes next. This …

When The Internet Attacks, Craig Cowie

Cardozo Law Review

Courts have struggled with applying personal jurisdiction in cases involving intentional torts where the defendants act outside the forum, and the problem is particularly apparent and acute when the defendants use the internet to commit the tort. For example, is there jurisdiction when a defendant doxxes someone and calls for violence? What if they leave a bad Yelp review? Or tweet a defamatory statement? Courts have used many tests for determining whether personal jurisdiction is appropriate in these situations, but there has been relatively little recent scholarship on whether these tests are appropriate for analyzing personal jurisdiction in these contexts. …

The Original E-Discovery: Civil Justice Reform And A Return To The Equitable Origins Of Discovery, Patricia I. Mcmahon

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

In the autumn of 2023, the Chief Justice and Attorney General of Ontario announced a broad new effort to review the rules of civil procedure to make civil dispute resolution more efficient and less expensive to enhance access to justice in the province. However, such efforts to reform the rules of civil procedure are nothing new.

This article examines the historical and contemporary aspects of civil justice reform in Ontario, focusing on the pre-trial discovery process. Among the most expensive aspects of the civil litigation process, discovery began as an equitable tool, with roots in the English Court of Chancery. …

El Cortez Reno Holdings, Llc V. Pfpco.’S Noble Pie Parlor, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. 68 (Dec. 23, 2025), Anastasia Vinson

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

"Professional courtesy" cannot be relied on to excuse procedural failures, as unopposed motions may be treated as concessions under DCR 13(3).

State Of Nevada Comm’R Of Insurance V. Chur; Chur V. State Of Nevada Comm’R Of Insurance, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. 69 (Dec. 23, 2025), Christianne White

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined a plaintiff may amend a complaint in response to a clarification of the pleading standard.

A Zealous Advocate, A Robust Cross: Cross-Examination Of Non-Adverse Witnesses By The Guardian Ad Litem, Scott Swain

BYU Law Review

“When the lives and fundamental rights of children are at stake, there must be no silent witnesses.”1 — Carol Bellamy

Systemic pressures in child welfare litigation regularly lead guardian ad litem attorneys to default to the positions and recommendations of state social services. In such cases, witnesses called by the state in trials and evidentiary hearings are non-adverse to the guardian ad litem. This dynamic undermines the purposes of cross-examination rules, threatening the procedural interests of the parties involved. This paper will use a procedural due process balancing test to guide its analysis as it proposes three potential solutions: a …

Standing In The Dark, Sharon Brett

BYU Law Review

Demonstrating standing for injunctive relief in § 1983 police misconduct cases is undisputedly difficult for civil rights plaintiffs. Under City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, plaintiffs seeking injunctions must present more than evidence of past misconduct; they must show a significant ongoing risk that they will experience the same misconduct again. Scholarly attention to Lyons has focused primarily on doctrinal errors in the Court’s legal analysis, and for good reason. But the case raises another important yet overlooked question: Can civil rights plaintiffs realistically demonstrate risk of future harm given (a) the limited data kept by law enforcement about their …

Discovering Melodies Or Discovering Lawsuits? Why The Discovery Rule Is Increasingly Inapplicable To Copyright Infringement As The War Over Generative Ai Wages On, Jack Pilon

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Six More Weeks Of Winter: The Third Circuit Rejects The Second Circuit’S Lenient Sec Asset Freeze Test And Champions Tradition In Sec V. Chappell, Elayna Tsiouplis

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Trial Practice And Procedure, Joseph M. Colwell, Christopher B. Mcdaniel, John D. Flowers, Madi Mcmichael Moseley

Mercer Law Review

This Article addresses selected opinions and legislation of interest to the Georgia civil trial practitioner issued during the survey period of this publication.

Rules Of Decision, Judicial Power, And The Valid Rule Requirement, John Harrison

Catholic University Law Review

Some current Supreme Court debates that concern seemingly specialized issues raise fundamental questions about the role of the Constitution in the legal system and the role of the courts when they decide constitutional issues. In recent years, Justice Thomas has suggested that the doctrines of First Amendment overbreadth, so-called third-party standing in cases involving constitutional liberty, and statutory inseverability call on federal courts to exceed their role under Article III. Justice Thomas maintains that when courts apply those doctrines, the courts decide cases not before them. Building on the work of Professor Henry Monaghan, this article argues that those concerns …

Rethinking Judicial Power & Remedial Restraint, Caprice L. Roberts

Catholic University Law Review

This Article maintains that groundbreaking Supreme Court cases reshaping judicial power and restraint are frequently remedies centric. The much- anticipated ruling in Trump v. CASA illustrates this correlation. Interpreting traditional equity, the Supreme Court circumscribed federal judicial power to issue universal relief. The Court relied on Marbury v. Madison to bolster its reasoning on the limits of judicial power. Ironically, both cases denied any remedy while enhancing the potential for future judicial power. Whether via judicial review and supremacy power or the Court’s future ability to now be the only federal court able to issue universal remedies—the Court’s role in …

Franceschi V. Lg Chem, Ltd., 141 Nev. Adv. Op. 65 (Dec. 18, 2025), Eden Tesfay

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

When there is a disconnect between a defendant’s contacts with the forum state and the harm alleged by the plaintiff, specific jurisdiction may not lie with the forum court.

A Comparative Analysis Of Domestic Violence Legislation In India And The United States: Understanding Protection Of Women Against Violence Act 2005 And Violence Against Women Act 1994, Deon Rodrigues

2025 Fall Honors Capstones Projects - Archive

Domestic violence continues to affect millions of individuals worldwide, yet legal systems respond to it in very different ways. This research compares how India’s Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (2005) and the United States’ Violence Against Women Act (1994; 2021) protect victims and hold offenders accountable. Using a comparative legal analysis, the study examines both laws’ language, enforcement mechanisms, and effectiveness through court cases, government reports, and statistical data. By identifying the strengths of the United States model such as mandatory arrest provisions and victim support systems, the study aims to propose practical reforms for India’s legal framework. …

It’S “Purposeful” For A Reason: Amb Media And Purposeful Availment In The Internet Age, Levi C. Griesing

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note argues that the Sixth Circuit’s ruling in AMB Media II expands the scope of personal jurisdiction to a degree that prevents fairness and due process for out-of-state defendants. Thus, this Note argues that the purposeful availment inquiry for cases involving generally-available commercial websites should include a targeting requirement—that there must first be an action to solicit business taken on behalf of the defendant in the forum state. Part I will review the goals of the personal jurisdiction doctrine and a brief history of purposeful availment cases before and after the Internet age. Part II will discuss AMB …

Interpreting Rule 23: A Legal Basis For Incentive Awards In Class Action Lawsuits, Chris Battaglia

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note first explores the methodologies that the Supreme Court utilizes to interpret the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and then applies these methodologies to interpret Rule 23. It argues that the Court has demonstrated two different viable strategies to interpret the Rules: (1) applying basic principles of statutory interpretation analysis and (2) giving effect to the policy and purpose surrounding the Rule. This Note concludes that both of these methodologies can be applied to Rule 23, and that as applied, both support the position that Rule 23 authorizes courts to legally grant incentive awards to named plaintiffs in …

Bagelmania Holdings, Llc V. Rdh Interests, Inc. C/W 87901, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. 62 (Dec. 04, 2025), Miranda Romero

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Affidavit-of-merit and expert report requirements under NRS § 11.258 are satisfied under a single set of submissions where the complainants (1) file a joint complaint, (2) assert identical claims, and (3) represented by the same attorney.

Fifth Circuit And Mississippi Law: Asked And Answered (Or Not), Caroline B. Smith, Emily K. Lindsay, Jim Rosenblatt

MC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Reasonability Rule For Medical Damages In Tort: In Defense Of Chargemaster Recovery, Avery E. Tunstill

Washington Law Review

In a personal injury suit, Washington law requires the plaintiff to prove that their medical costs are reasonable to recover damages for those costs. Tort reform proponents attempt to use this reasonability rule to limit tort damages awards. They argue that a plaintiff should only recover a portion of a hospital’s bill because most people do not pay a hospital’s sticker price—or the “chargemaster rate”—for medical care. Some reformers argue that recovery rates should instead be based on a set figure. Others argue in favor of eliminating the collateral source rule, which prohibits juries from reducing tort damages awards in …