Legal Remedies Commons^™

Kumble V. Voccola, 253 A.3d 1248 (R.I. 2021), Aryamen Andrew Omshehe

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Belmore V. Petterutti, 253 A.3d 864 (R.I. 2021), Whitney A. Saunders

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Epic Enters. V. 10 Brown & Howard Wharf Condo. Ass’N, 253 A.3d 383 (R.I. 2021), Matthew Lewicki

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Preliminary Damages, Gideon Parchomovsky, Alex Stein

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Carey Law

Historically, the law helped impecunious plaintiffs overcome their inherent disadvantage in civil litigation. Unfortunately, this is no longer the case: modern law has largely abandoned the mission of assisting the least well off. In this Essay, we propose a new remedy that can dramatically improve the fortunes of poor plaintiffs and thereby change the errant path of the law: preliminary damages. The unavailability of preliminary damages has dire implications for poor plaintiffs, especially those wronged by affluent individuals and corporations. Resource constrained plaintiffs cannot afford prolonged litigation on account of their limited financial means. Consequently, they are forced to either …

Relying On Restatements, Shyamkrishna Balganesh

Faculty Scholarship

Restatements of the Law occupy a unique place in the Americanlegal system. For nearly a century, they have played a prominent and influential role as legal texts that courts routinely rely on in a wide variety of fields. Despite their ubiquitous and pervasive use by courts, Restatements are not formal sources of law. While they resemble statutes in their form and structure, Restatements are produced entirely by a private organization of experts set up to clarify and simplify the law and thus lack the force of law on their own. And yet, courts treat them as formal and authoritative sources …

Standing, Equity, And Injury In Fact, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

This contribution to the Notre Dame Law Review's annual Federal Courts symposium on "The Nature of the Federal Equity Power" asks what the traditions of equity can tell us about Article III standing. I take as my point of departure the observation by Professors Sam Bray and Paul Miller, in their contribution to the symposium, that equity does not have causes of action as such--or at least not in the same way as actions at law. This is potentially important for standing, as many academic critiques of the Supreme Court's standing jurisprudence have argued that standing should turn on whether …

Aedpa Repeal, Brandon L. Garrett, Kaitlin Phillips

Faculty Scholarship

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”) dramatically altered the scope of federal habeas corpus. Enacted in response to a domestic terrorism attack, followed by a capital prosecution, and after decades of proposals seeking to limit post conviction review of death sentences, and Supreme Court rulings severely limiting federal habeas remedies, AEDPA was ratified with little discussion or deliberation. The law and politics of death penalty litigation, which had been particularly active since the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated all death penalty schemes in its 1972 ruling in Furman v. Georgia, culminated in restrictions for all federal habeas …

The Efficacy Of The Independent Counsel Law: Holding Presidents To Account From Nixon To Trump, Joseph Casey Carbone

Senior Projects Spring 2022

Senior Project submitted to The Division of Social Studies of Bard College.

Sequencing In Damages, Edward K. Cheng, Ehud Guttel, Yuval Procaccia

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Tort law contains multiple doctrines governing the assignment of liability and the calculation of damages. But in what sequence should courts apply these doctrines? Does it matter, for example, whether a court applies comparative fault before or after mitigation of damages? The answer, rather surprisingly, is that sequencing does matter, and it can substantially affect the compensation that a tort victim ultimately receives. Yet the existing case law on sequencing is ad hoc, inconsistent, and undertheorized, and the issue has been entirely overlooked by the academic literature. In this Article, we introduce and examine the question of sequencing. We offer …

Cause For Concern Or Cause For Celebration?: Did Bostock V. Clayton County Establish A New Mixed Motive Theory For Title Vii Case And Make It Easier For Plaintiffs To Prove Discrimination Claims?, Terrence Cain

Seattle University Law Review

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it unlawful for an employer to discriminate against an employee “because of” race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. This seems simple enough, but if an employer makes an adverse employment decision partly for an impermissible reason and partly for a permissible reason, i.e., if the employer acts with a mixed motive, has the employer acted “because of” the impermissible reason? According to Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, the answer is no. The Courts in Gross and Nassar held …

Getting Into Equity, Samuel Bray, Paul Miller

Journal Articles

For two centuries, common lawyers have frequently talked about a “cause of action.” But “cause of action” is not an organizing principle for equity. This Article shows how a plaintiff gets into equity, and it shows equity is shaped by the interplay of its remedial, procedural, and substantive law. Equity is adjectival, related to law rather than the other way around. Remedies, not rights, are what give it power. And for getting into equity, it is the grievance that is central. To insist on an equitable cause of action is to work a fundamental change in how a plaintiff gets …

Equity, Law And The Seventh Amendment, Samuel Bray

Journal Articles

The Seventh Amendment requires that the civil jury trial right be “preserved” in “Suits at common law.” Those bits of constitutional text have long set the justices on a path of historical reconstruction. For roughly two centuries, the Supreme Court has determined the scope of the civil jury trial right in federal court by reference to historic English courts. But no one is happy with the current test. In one widely used variant, it requires an inquiry into analogous 1791 actions, followed by an inquiry into the legal or equitable provenance of the remedy sought, and then a weighing that …

Arbitrating Copyright Disputes In Egypt, Islam Mohamed

Maurer Theses and Dissertations

Egypt is witnessing increasing difficulty in implementing and practicing protectionist policies for intellectual property rights, which includes copyright as a fundamental element. Since the Egyptian judicial system is exclusively concerned with adjudicating all disputes, it has become increasingly burdened in recent decades due to this monopoly. As a result, the Egyptian judiciary is witnessing a significant slowdown in resolving conflicts and procedural obstacles which delay the restitution of Intellectual property rights to its owners. Thus, we believe that applying arbitration will contribute to resolving copyright disputes in advance on one hand and will encourage an attractive climate in such matters …

Copyright’S Deprivations, Anne-Marie Carstens

Washington Law Review

This Article challenges the constitutionality of a copyright infringement remedy provided in federal copyright law: courts can order the destruction or other permanent deprivation of personal property based on its mere capacity to serve as a vehicle for infringement. This deprivation remedy requires no showing of actual nexus to the litigated infringement, no finding of willfulness, and no showing that the property’s infringing uses comprise the significant or predominant uses. These striking deficits stem from a historical fiction that viewed a tool of infringement, such as a printing plate, as the functional equivalent of an infringing copy itself. Today, though, …

Hostile Restructurings, Diane L. Dick

Washington Law Review

The conventional wisdom holds that out-of-court loan restructurings are mostly consensual and collaborative. But this is no longer accurate. Highly aggressive, nonconsensual restructuring transactions—what I call “hostile restructurings”—are becoming a common feature of the capital markets. Relying on hypertechnical interpretations of loan agreements, one increasingly popular hostile restructuring method involves issuing new debt that enjoys higher priority than the existing debt; another involves transferring the most valuable collateral away from existing lenders to secure new borrowing.

These transactions are distinguishable from normal out-of-court restructurings by their use of coercive tactics to overcome not only the traditional minority lender holdout problem, …

Structural Barriers To Inclusion In Arbitrator Pools, Nicole G. Iannarone

Washington Law Review

Critics increasingly challenge mandatory arbitration because the pools from which decisionmakers are selected are neither diverse nor inclusive. Evaluating diversity and inclusion in arbitrator pools is difficult due to the black box nature of mandatory arbitration. This Article evaluates inclusion in arbitrator pools through a case study on securities arbitration. The Article relies upon the relatively greater transparency of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) forum. It begins by describing the unique role that small claims securities arbitration plays in maintaining investor trust and confidence in the securities markets before describing why ensuring that the FINRA arbitrator pool is both …

You Are Not A Commodity: A More Efficient Approach To Commercial Privacy Rights, Benjamin T. Pardue

Washington Law Review

United States common law provides four torts for privacy invasion: (1) disclosure of private facts, (2) intrusion upon seclusion, (3) placement of a person in a false light, and (4) appropriation of name or likeness. Appropriation of name or likeness occurs when a defendant commandeers the plaintiff’s recognizability, typically for a commercial benefit. Most states allow plaintiffs who establish liability to recover defendants’ profits as damages from the misappropriation under an “unjust enrichment” theory. By contrast, this Comment argues that such an award provides a windfall to plaintiffs and contributes to suboptimal social outcomes. These include overcompensating plaintiffs and incentivizing …

Without A Voice, Without A Forum: Finding Iirira Section 1252(G) Unconstitutional, Amanda Simms

Brooklyn Law Review

The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) abrogates sovereign immunity in certain circumstances to allow private individuals, regardless of citizenship, to sue the United States for specific torts committed by government officials. Yet when two lawful permanent residents—located in different parts of the country—separately tried to sue the government for wrongful removal, one court dismissed the suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction while the other court did not. These decisions, though reaching opposite conclusions, both relied on federal immigration statute 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g) in order to determine whether judicial review of immigrants’ removal orders is precluded. This note argues …

Remedies For Government Breach: Lessons From The United States And A Zone Of Appealable Remedies For Southeast Asia, Benjamin D. Black

Brooklyn Law Review

Though international investment treaties may supplant domestic contract law in cross-border government contracts, their limited use in Southeast Asia informs the continued importance of clear remedies for a government breach of contract under domestic law. As investment from China’s Belt and Road Initiative continues to flow into the region, private parties require clear rules and remedies when a government breaches a contract. This note argues that the lack of clear and codified public contract law in Southeast Asia presents a substantial risk to private contractors and that the extreme variance in public contract law is detrimental to both parties involved. …

Antitrust And Platform Monopoly, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Carey Law

Are large digital platforms that deal directly with consumers “winner take all,” or natural monopoly, firms? That question is surprisingly complex and does not produce the same answer for every platform. The closer one looks at digital platforms the less they seem to be winner-take-all. As a result, competition can be made to work in most of them. Further, antitrust enforcement, with its accommodation of firm variety, is generally superior to any form of statutory regulation that generalizes over large numbers.

Assuming that an antitrust violation is found, what should be the remedy? Breaking up large firms subject to extensive …