Civil Procedure Commons^™

De Facto Class Actions: Plaintiff-And Defendant-Oriented Injunctions In Voting Rights, Election Law, And Other Constitutional Cases, Michael T. Morley

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

New Rules Of War In The Battle Of The Experts: Amending The Expert Witness Disqualification Test For Conflicts Of Interest, Nina A. Vershuta

Brooklyn Law Review

In civil litigation, the big business of retaining experts has raised concerns about the integrity of the adversarial process and undermined the role that expert testimony plays at trial. Due to a rising demand for expert testimony, it is common for the same expert to testify for opposing clients. When a client hires an expert who has been previously retained by that client’s adversary, a conflict of interest arises. Such experts may share confidential information with their new client to the detriment of the former client—triggering the expert disqualification test for conflicts of interest. Most state and federal courts do …

Psychological Harm And Constitutional Standing, Rachel Bayefsky

Brooklyn Law Review

When do psychological or emotional harms count as “injury-in-fact” for the purposes of satisfying Article III standing requirements, and when should they? Courts have wrestled with whether to grant standing, for example, to family members of a man killed by the police who argued that as relatives of the deceased, they had suffered emotional pain; members of an animal-welfare organization who claimed they had undergone “sleeplessness, depression, and anger” when they were unable to visit an elephant at the zoo; and members of a Catholic organization who challenged a city resolution criticizing the Catholic Church’s stance on adoption by same-sex …

The Necessary Narrowing Of General Personal Jurisdiction, William Grayson Lambert

Marquette Law Review

General personal jurisdiction allows a court to issue a binding judgment against a defendant in any case, even if the facts giving rise to the case are unrelated to that forum. In the six decades after International Shoe v. Washington, courts held that general jurisdiction existed whenever a defendant had substantial continuous and systemic contacts with the forum. This rule was narrowed significantly in 2011, however, when the Supreme Court in Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown held that general jurisdiction was properly exercised only when a defendant had sufficient contacts to be “at home” in the forum.

A Brief Survey Of The Treatment Of Electronically Stored Information By Federal Agencies, Richard Dauphinais

University of Baltimore Law Review

Discovery involving electronically stored information (ESI) in federal court litigation has been a matter of extensive discussion in the legal community. Somewhat less examined has been the treatment of ESI by federal agencies. This article takes a look at how some agencies have addressed issues related to ESI. By the late 1990s, federal court practitioners and judges had recognized that the increased use of computers was generating enormous amounts of ESI. The increase in ESI, in turn, affected litigation because it "expanded exponentially" the "universe of discoverable material." Prior to 2006, the federal courts dealt with the discovery of electronic …

Friends, Followers, Connections, Lend Me Your Ears: A New Test For Determining The Sufficiency Of Service Of Process Via Social Media, Christopher M. Finke

University of Baltimore Law Review

The emergence of social media as a driving force in modern society has brought it to the forefront of legal discussion in all areas of law. Fields of study such as evidence, ethics, and constitutional law are all currently wrestling with how social media ought to be handled. In particular, courts have attempted to determine whether service of process (or simply “service”) should be satisfied by the use of communication through social media. Since 1950, courts have relied upon the same test, regardless of the method used, to determine the sufficiency of service: the Mullane test. Mullane as currently applied, …

Trying The Trial, Andrew S. Pollis

Faculty Publications

Lawyers routinely make strategic advocacy choices that reflect directly, if inferentially, on the credibility of their clients’ claims and defenses. But courts have historically been reluctant to admit evidence of litigation conduct, sometimes even expressing hostility at the very notion of doing so. This Article deconstructs that reluctance. It argues not only that litigation conduct has probative value, but also that there is social utility in subjecting lawyer behavior to juror scrutiny.

Crossing The Line: Daubert, Dual Roles, And The Admissibility Of Forensic Mental Health Testimony, Sara Gordon

Scholarly Works

Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals often testify as forensic experts in civil commitment and criminal competency proceedings. When an individual clinician assumes both a treatment and a forensic role in the context of a single case, however, that clinician forms a dual relationship with the patient—a practice that creates a conflict of interest and violates professional ethical guidelines. The court, the parties, and the patient are all affected by this conflict and the biased testimony that may result from dual relationships. When providing forensic testimony, the mental health professional’s primary duty is to the court, not to the patient, …

A Further Note On Federal Causes Of Action, John F. Preis

Law Faculty Publications

In the article, I argue that federal causes of action ought to be treated as (1) distinct from substantive rights, (2) synonymous with the availability of a remedy (but not whether a remedy will in fact issue) and (3) distinct from subject matter jurisdiction (unless Congress instructs otherwise). This thesis is built principally on a historical recounting of the cause of action from eighteenth century England to twenty-first century America. In taking an historical approach, I did not mean to argue that federal courts are bound to adhere to centuries-old conceptions of the cause of action. I merely used history …

Lawyers, Power, And Strategic Expertise, Colleen F. Shanahan, Anna E. Carpenter, Alyx Mark

Faculty Scholarship

The only sound in a courtroom is the hum of the ventilation system. It feels as if everyone in the room is holding their breath …. Litigants are uneasy in the courthouse, plaintiffs and defendants alike. They fidget. They keep their coats on. They clutch their sheaves of paper-rent receipts and summonses, leases and bills. You can always tell the lawyers, because they claim the front row, take off their jackets, lay out their files. It's not just their ease with the language and the process that sets them apart. They dominate the space.

This empirical study analyzes the experience …

Heightened Procedure, Jessica M. Erickson

Law Faculty Publications

When it comes to combating meritless litigation, how much should procedure matter? Conventional wisdom holds that procedure should be uniform, with the same rules applying in all civil cases. Yet the causes of meritless litigation are not uniform, making it difficult for identical procedures to address the problem. As a result, lawmakers frequently turn to what this Article calls “heightened procedure”—additional procedures applicable only in designated areas of the law. Across a variety of substantive areas, lawmakers have adopted heightened pleading standards, stays of discovery, agency review, and a multitude of other tools from the heightened procedural toolbox. Despite the …

"Sense Of Access To Justice" As A Framework For Civil Procedure Justice Reform: An Empirical Assessment Of Judicial Settlement Conferences In Quebec (Canada), Jean-François Roberge

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

An emerging worldwide civil procedure justice reform trend takes the user's point of view into account in order to promote access-tojustice and support for the rule of law. In the Canadian context, the Quebec civil law province has taken the lead to renew its legal culture towards a participatory justice, rooted in fair-minded processes that encourage the persons involved to play an active role. In an effort to monitor such ambitions, carried by the civil procedure code reforms of 2003 and 2014, our paper offers an empirical evaluation through the lens of litigant's "Sense of Access to Justice" ("SA"). We …

Commonality And The Constitution: A Framework For Federal And State Court Class Actions, Joseph A. Seiner

Indiana Law Journal

In Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011), the Supreme Court concluded that the allegations of pay discrimination in a case brought by over one million female employees lacked sufficient commonality to warrant class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a). Though the case was expressly decided under the Federal Rules, some well-known employer groups have begun to advance the argument that Wal-Mart was decided on constitutional grounds. These advocates maintain that the Supreme Court’s decision creates a commonality standard for all class-action plaintiffs—regardless of whether those litigants bring their claims in federal or state court. …

Reality Check: A Modest Modification To Rationalize Rule 803 Hearsay Exceptions, Liesa L. Richter

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

Virginia Practice Series: Jury Instructions, Ronald J. Bacigal, Margaret Ivey Bacigal

Law Faculty Publications

Virginia Practice Series-Jury Instructions is a continuation and update of previous editions, which won widespread approval among the bench and bar for almost 40 years.

As in the past, this book is primarily confined to the most common areas of jury trial work, torts and criminal law. Where possible, the language of the instructions is taken directly from reported cases or case records. Where this is not possible, we have set out instructions that should meet both the general rules regarding the form of instructions and the specific substantive legal rules. In the latter cases, close attention has been paid …

Cross-Cutting Conflicts: Developments In The Use Of Norwich Orders In Internet Defamation Cases, Robert Currie

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The anonymity afforded to those wishing to post commentary on the internet has given rise to a number of procedural issues in Canadian case law. This paper focuses on one such issue: the need for prospective plaintiffs in defamation actions to "unmask" anonymous commentators in order to be able to bring proceedings against them. It tracks the increasing use of the "Norwich order," A.K.A an order for pre-action discovery, as a means of accomplishing this objective, by examining the leading case of Warman v. Fournier and analyzing how this issue has played out in litigation to date. It also considers …

Civil Procedure's Five Big Ideas, Kevin M. Clermont

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Civil procedure, more than any other of the basic law-school courses, conveys to students an understanding of the whole legal system. I propose that this purpose should become, more openly, the organizing theme of the course. The focus should remain, of course, on the mechanics of the judicial branch. What I champion is giving some conscious attention, albeit mainly in the background and at an introductory level, to the big ideas of the constitutional structure within which the law formulates civil procedure. Such attention would unify the doctrinal study, while enriching it for the students and revealing its true importance.

An Active Learning Approach To Teaching Tough Topics: Personal Jurisdiction As An Example, Cynthia M. Ho

Faculty Publications & Other Works

No abstract provided.

Who Has Standing? Why The Supreme Court's Holding In Hollingsworth V. Perry Empowers Politicians At The Expense Of Citizens, Omar Subat

Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development

No abstract provided.

Paterno V. Laser Spine Institute: Did The New York Court Of Appeals' Misapplication Of Unjustified Policy Fears Lead To A Miscarriage Of Justice And The Creation Of Inadequate Precedent For The Proper Use Of The Empire State’S Long-Arm Statute?, Jay C. Carlisle, Christine M. Murphy, Kiersten M. Schramek, Marley Strauss

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This article discusses CPLR section 302(a)(1) as applied by the New York State Court of Appeals in Paterno v. Laser Spine Institute. The Paterno Court failed to properly apply a statutory jurisdictional analysis by conflating it with a due process inquiry. Also, the Court unnecessarily balanced the interests of the Empire State's citizens in having a forum for access to justice with unjustified policy fears of potential costs to the state from assertions of in personam jurisdiction. Furthermore, the Court's policy focus4 on the protection of medical doctors from lawsuits and the prevention of “floodgate” litigation which would adversely affect …