Litigation Commons^™

Outpatient Commitment: The Role Of Counsel In Preserving Client Autonomy, R. A. Bernfeld

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

The Disadvantaged Plaintiff: Is It Time To Revisit The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, Matthew Engellenner

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law - Revising The Application Of Tinker And Fraser In The Age Of The Internet - J.S. Ex Rel. Snyder V. Blue Mountain School District, 650 F.3d 915 (3d Cir. 2011), Christopher Lynett

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law - Failed The Breathalyzer: Just Contest The Location Of The Stop - Commonwealth V. Virgilio, 947 N.E.2d 1112 (Mass. App. Ct. 2011), Jillise Ketcham

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law - New Evidence In Gateway Claim Of Actual Innocence Requires Evidence Not Previously Available At Trail - Kidd V. Norman, 651 F.3d 947 (8th Cir. 2011), David Cashman

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law - Seventh Circuit Denies Sovereign Immunity Defense To Counterclaims For Appealing State Agency - Board Of Regents Of The University Of Wisconsin System V. Phoenix International Software, Inc., 653 F.3d 448 (7th Cir. 2011), Daniel S. Tyler

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

The Future Of Internet-Related Personal Jurisdiction After Goodyear Dunlap Tires V. Brown And J. Mcintyre V. Nicastro, Megan M. La Belle

Scholarly Articles

For the past two decades, courts have struggled with the question of how Internet-related contacts should be treated in the personal jurisdiction analysis. Some courts have utilized the traditional minimum contacts framework of International Shoe v. Washington , while others have devised new tests to accommodate this technological evolution. So when the US Supreme Court granted certiorari in two personal jurisdiction cases last term— Goodyear Dunlap Tires v. Brown and J. McIntyre v. Nicastro — many believed these unsettled questions of Internet related personal jurisdiction would finally be resolved. Disappointingly for litigants, lower courts, and academics, however, Goodyear and McIntyre …

Institutional Activism Through Litigation: An Empirical Analysis Of Public Pension Fund Participation In Securities Class Actions, Michael A. Perino

Faculty Publications

The PSLRA’s lead plaintiff provision enlisted institutional investors to monitor class counsel in order to curb the agency costs endemic in securities class actions. This article uses a sample of 731 settlements to examine the efficacy of this provision. It finds that, even when controlling for institutional self-selection of potentially easier or higher-quality cases, cases with public pension lead plaintiffs have larger recoveries and lower fee requests and fee awards than cases with other lead plaintiff types. The article also finds evidence consistent with the existence of a significant positive externality associated with public pension participation. Over time, fee requests …

Five Mistakes For New Child-Welfare Lawyers To Avoid, Jennifer Baum

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

You’ve graduated, passed the bar, and started your first legal job working with children and families. Perhaps you work for an institutional provider of legal services for children or as a prosecutor of dependency cases, or perhaps you are defending such cases. Perhaps, still, you are in private practice, and this is your first pro bono experience working on a family or juvenile court matter. Whatever your role, your job is the same: to represent your client and seek as favorable an outcome as possible.

But you are new—you don’t know the ropes or who the players are, you …

Is Canada The New Shangri-La Of Global Securities Class Actions?, Tanya J. Monestier

Journal Articles

There has been significant academic buzz about Silver v. Imax, an Ontario case certifying a global class of shareholders alleging statutory and common law misrepresentation in connection with a secondary market distribution of shares. Although global class actions on a more limited scale have been certified in Canada prior to Imax, it can now be said that global classes have “officially” arrived in Canada. Many predict that the Imax decision means that Ontario will become the new center for the resolution of global securities disputes. This is particularly so after the United States largely relinquished this role in Morrison v. …

Changes In The European Union's Regime Of Recognizing And Enforcing Judgments And Transnational Litigation In The United States, Samuel P. Baumgartner

Akron Law Faculty Publications

The European Commission has proposed to amend (recast) the Brussels I Regulation, which governs jurisdiction to adjudicate, parallel proceedings, and judgments recognition within the European Union. Although much of the Brussels I Regulation is simply the 1968 Brussels Convention cast into European Union legislation, the proposed amendments are part of a deeper set of structural and conceptual changes in the law of transnational litigation within the Union over the past couple of decades. Understanding these changes is essential to understanding what drives the proposed amendments and what is likely to follow.

In this paper – presented at the symposium Our …

Arbitrability And Vulnerability, Carolyn L. Dessin

Akron Law Faculty Publications

Arbitration is cool. Everybody‟s doing it. In the eighty-five years since the passage of the Federal Arbitration Act, that seems to be the prevailing sentiment. Recent decades have seen the meteoric rise of arbitration as a form of alternative dispute resolution. Arbitration is widely regarded as a less expensive, more expeditious alternative to litigation.

Courts frequently note that federal policy clearly favors arbitration. No judicial enthusiasm for arbitration seems more complete than that evidenced in the jurisprudence of the United States Supreme Court.

Along with the rise of arbitration, however, there has also been a rise in the amount of …

Rejecting Sovereign Immunity In Public Law Litigation, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Plausibility Pleading And Employment Discrimination, Suzette M. Malveaux

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Evolution Of The Summary Trial: A Flexible Tool To Meet A Variety Of Needs, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Nicole L. Waters

Faculty Publications

Are summary jury trials a viable forum for dispute resolution? The National Center for State Courts studied summary trials in six state courts to understand how these programs work and to determine the benefits and detriments of this approach to dispute resolution.

Suing Courts, Frederic Bloom, Christopher Serkin

Publications

This Article argues for a new and unexpected mechanism of judicial accountability: suing courts. Current models of court accountability focus almost entirely on correcting legal errors. A suit against the court would concentrate on something different--on providing transition relief, by way of legal remedy, to those bearing the heaviest burdens of desirable legal change. These suits may at first appear impossible. But suing courts is conceptually rational and mechanically reasonable, a tool that eases legal transitions while navigating the many hurdles modern doctrine puts in the way. This Article sets out the first complete account of how, where, and why …

The Past And Future Of Deinstitutionalization Litigation, Samuel R. Bagenstos

Articles

Two conflicting stories have consumed the academic debate regarding the impact of deinstitutionalization litigation. The first, which has risen almost to the level of conventional wisdom, is that deinstitutionalization was a disaster. The second story challenges the suggestion that deinstitutionalization has uniformly been unsuccessful, as well as the causal link critics seek to draw with the growth of the homeless population. This Article, which embraces the second story, assesses the current wave of deinstitutionalization litigation. It contends that things will be different this time. The particular outcomes of the first wave of deinstitutionalization litigation, this Article contends, resulted from the …

The Character Of The Governmental Action, Thomas W. Merrill

Faculty Scholarship

Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City holds a secure position in the architecture of the regulatory takings doctrine. That doctrine is at bottom a tool for distinguishing between different governmental powers; in particular, between the power of eminent domain and the police power. Because eminent domain requires that compensation be paid, whereas the police power does not, it is necessary to draw a line between these powers. Conceivably we could simply take the legislature at its word as to which power it is exercising. But at least since Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, the Supreme Court has insisted …

Litigation Finance: What Do Judges Need To Know?, Bert Huang

Faculty Scholarship

In our classic image of an American lawsuit, including class actions, the plaintiffs lawyer pays the upfront costs and then hopes to recoup them from a share of the winnings. But today, this picture is incomplete. It is no longer only the law firm's own war chest that finances a case – so can outside investors and lenders. As Judge Hellerstein has just reminded us, the 9/11 cases he presided over involved such third-party financing. The Ecuadorian plaintiffs' environmental case against Chevron, now pending in the Southern District of New York, is another prominent example in the news.

Aggregate Litigation Goes Public: Representative Suits By State Attorneys General, Margaret H. Lemos

Faculty Scholarship

State attorneys general represent their citizens in aggregate litigation that bears a striking resemblance to the much-maligned damages class action. Yet, while class actions are subject to a raft of procedural rules designed to protect absent class members, equivalent suits in the public sphere are largely free from constraint. The procedural disconnect between the two categories of aggregate litigation reflects a widespread assumption that attorneys general will adequately represent the interests of the state’s citizens, obviating any need for case-specific mechanisms for assuring the loyalty of lawyer to client.

This Article challenges the presumption of adequate public representation. By conflating …