Litigation Commons^™

“Fundamental Fairness”: Finding A Civil Right To Counsel In International Human Rights Law, Meredith Elliot Hollman

Law Student Publications

Every other Western democracy now recognizes a right to counsel in at least some kinds of civil cases, typically those involving basic human rights. The World Justice Project’s 2021 Rule of Law Index ranked the United States 126th of 139 countries for “People Can Access and Afford Civil Justice.” Within its regional and income categories, the United States was dead last. The United Nations and other international treaty bodies have urged the United States to improve access to justice by providing civil legal aid. How did we fall behind, and what can we learn from the rest of the world? …

Fuoco V. Polisena, 244 A.3d 124 (R.I. 2021), David Marks

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Event-Driven Suits And The Rethinking Of Securities Litigation, Merritt B. Fox, Joshua Mitts

Faculty Scholarship

Event-driven securities suits-ones that arise after an issuer has experienced some kind of disaster-have become increasingly prevalent in recent years. These suits are based on the fraud-on-the-market doctrine, a doctrine that ultimately gives rise to the bulk of the damages paid out in settlements and judgments pursuant to private litigation under the U.S. securities laws. The theory behind fraud-on-the-market cases is that when an issuer's share price has been inflated by a Rule-10b-5-violating misstatement, investors who purchased shares at the inflated price have suffered a compensable injury if they still hold the shares after the inflation is gone. Although these …

Constraining Corporate Law Principles In Affiliate World, Anita K. Krug

Emory Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Transnational Exchange Of Law Through Climate Change Litigation, Natasha Affolder, Godwin Dzah

All Faculty Publications

Climate change litigation continues to bash holes in the view of domestic legal systems as hermetically sealed units. Domestic cases are inspired by litigation elsewhere, actively fostered by transnational advocacy communities, and the decisions themselves are indicative of transjudicial influences and sometimes even dialogue on climate change. This chapter, written in 2021 to reflect the transnationalism of early climate change litigation, takes a close look at practices of transjudicialism in climate change litigation. In so doing, it seeks to disrupt some default patterns of studying the spread of law. By problematizing the practices of ‘finding’ influential climate law cases, measuring …

Contempt Power And The United States Courts, Joshua Carback

Mitchell Hamline Law Journal of Public Policy and Practice

Contempt power is one of the most important legacies of English common law in federal common law. Substantively, the contempt power of the United States Courts is relatively similar to that employed by the Court of King’s Bench in the eighteenth century. Procedurally, however, it is quite different. The Rules Enabling Act of 1934 created an interbranch framework for crafting procedural rules for the United States Courts. All three branches of the federal government collaborated under that framework with the intention of rationalizing, systemizing, and delimiting the boundaries of contempt power. The culmination of decades of strenuous rulemaking, unfortunately, was …

Mandatory Child Custody Mediation: A Call On California To Protect Domestic Violence Survivors, Anne M. Sidwell

University of San Francisco Law Review

No abstract provided.

Corporate Governance And Gender Equality: A Study Of Comply-Or-Explain Disclosure Regulation, Aaron A. Dhir, Sarah Kaplan, Maria Arabella Robles

Seattle University Law Review

In 2020, the Nasdaq Stock Market filed a proposal with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission seeking permission to adopt a board diversity-related disclosure requirement for its listed companies. In 2021, the SEC approved the proposal, thus entrenching Nasdaq’s position as the most significant stock exchange to date to mandate listing rules that reflect the intention of diversifying corporate boardrooms. Nasdaq’s movement into the diversity space is not the first attempt to address homogeneous boards in the U.S. In 2009, the SEC adopted a rule requiring publicly traded firms to report on whether they consider diversity in identifying director nominees. …

Judicial Ethics And The Eradication Of Racism, Dontay Proctor-Mills

Seattle University Law Review

In 2020, the Washington Supreme Court entrusted the legal community with working to eradicate racism from its legal system. Soon after, Washington’s Commission on Judicial Conduct (hereinafter the Commission) received a complaint about a bus ad for North Seattle College featuring King County Superior Court Judge David Keenan. Along with a photo of Judge Keenan’s face, the ad included the following language: “A Superior Court Judge, David Keenan got into law in part to advocate for marginalized communities. David’s changing the world. He started at North.” The Commission admonished Judge Keenan for violating the Code of Judicial Conduct, in part …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Why Corporate Boards Should Include Lgbtq+ People, Jeremy Mcclane, Darren Rosenblum

Seattle University Law Review

Corporate boardrooms sit at the heart of most of society’s most consequential decisions but fall far short of the diversity of our society. The current movement toward board diversification aims to remedy the underrepresentation of marginalized groups on corporate boards. More recently, some efforts have included LGBTQ+ people, even though the basis for their inclusion on corporate boards remains largely unstated. This Article examines both the normative and instrumental bases for LGBTQ+ inclusion in board diversity initiatives, articulating unspoken assumptions and linking LGBTQ+ people to the broader inclusion effort. In so doing, it begins to surface the unique issues LGBTQ+ …

Undoing Undue Influence: How The Doctrine Can Avoid Judicial Subjectivity By Omitting The Vulnerability Element, Robin Boyle-Laisure

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

The utility of the doctrine of undue influence has been declining for several decades because of its inclusion of the element of vulnerability or, put another way, inquiry into the mind of the one allegedly being influenced. I argue that the courts’ inquiry into the mind of the influencee to determine whether this person was vulnerable is not a useful construct as an element of the doctrine. This Article addresses three contexts in which assessing one’s vulnerability is problematic: (1) in the contract formation process occurring in the general population (meaning not within a high-control group), such as the …

Time To Slapp Back: Advocating Against The Adverse Civil Liberties Implications Of Litigation That Undermines Public Participation, Jennifer Safstrom

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Defamation law is a catchall term encompassing civil claims for reputational harm to an individual, including slander and libel. Defamation claims originated in English common law and have since evolved within the American legal system. Scholars have characterized the law of defamation as “a forest of complexities, overgrown with anomalies, inconsistencies, and perverse rigidities” and as a “‘fog of fictions, inferences, and presumptions.’” Amid these inherent variations and complexities of defamation law and litigation — including the largely state-specific nature of tort law development — emerges a disturbing trend across jurisdictions. In the modern era, defamation claims have been used …

Data Versus More Data In Multidistrict Litigation, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

A reply to Lynn A. Baker & Andrew Bradt, Anecdotes in the Search for Truth About Multidistrict Litigation, 107 Cornell Law Review Online 249 (2023).

Perceptions of Justice in Multi-district Litigation: Voices from the Crowd presents the results of a study that no one wanted us to do—or help us to do. Professors Lynn Baker and Andrew Bradt would prefer to dismiss as “anecdote” our two-year effort to find and gain the trust of multi-district litigation (MDL) plaintiffs whose attorneys told them not to discuss their case with anyone, including us.

There are decades worth of procedural justice studies …

Mdl For The People, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

By the terms of its own statute and the limits of its constitutional authority, multidistrict litigation (“MDL”) is designed to transfer and coordinate individual lawsuits then return plaintiffs back to their chosen fora for case-specific discovery and trial. Because each plaintiff is present and has her own lawyer, there is no need for the judge to police conflicts of interest or attorney loyalty as in the MDL’s kin, the class action.

But these assumptions do not match the empirical reality. Remand is rare. MDL judges resolve ninety-nine percent of the cases before them. And to some attorneys, the people of …

The Business Of Securities Class Action Lawyering, Jessica M. Erickson, Stephen J. Choi, Adam C. Pritchard

Law Faculty Publications

Plaintiffs’ lawyers in the United States play a key role in combating corporate fraud. Shareholders who lose money as a result of fraud can file securities class actions to recover their losses, but most shareholders do not have enough money at stake to justify overseeing the cases filed on their behalf. As a result, plaintiffs’ lawyers control these cases, deciding which cases to file and how to litigate them. Recognizing the agency costs inherent in this model, the legal system relies on lead plaintiffs and judges to monitor these lawyers and protect the best interests of absent class members. Yet …

The City Suit, Zachary D. Clopton, Nadav Shoked

Emory Law Journal

This Article addresses the role of local governments in the most American of activities: the lawsuit. During the last few decades, city litigation has grown more proactive, diverse, and prominent. Cities now frequently file lawsuits respecting the most notable issues of the day. Each of these suits involves specific policy concerns peculiar to its subject matter, but as a group—as a legal phenomenon—they all raise common, and disputed, doctrinal questions pertaining to standing, local preemption, res judicata, state immunity, and more.

When tackling these diverse doctrinal issues—sounding in both civil procedure and local government law—courts and scholars have failed to …

Interpleader As A Vehicle For Challenging The Constitutionality Of Private Citizen Action Statutes, Delia Parker

Fordham Law Review

The rise of vigilante-esque statutes creates obstacles for litigants seeking to challenge a statute’s constitutionality. State legislatures in Texas and California enacted laws regulating constitutionally protected activity (abortion and firearm possession, respectively) through statutes enforced solely by private actors. The state legislatures cleverly crafted Texas S.B. 8, as well as other copycat statutes, as bounty hunter statutes to block litigants’ usual path to pre-enforcement adjudication—filing a claim against the state to enjoin its actors from enforcing the improper provisions.

The Texas and California state legislatures attempted to forbid constitutionally protected conduct by granting enforcement power to an infinite number of …

A Survey Of The Literature On Federal Appellate Practice And Procedure, Thomas E. Baker

FIU Law Review

This is a survey of the literature related to appellate practice and procedure before the United States Courts of Appeals for the benefit of lawyers and judges and scholars. It is reproduced with permission from THOMAS E. BAKER, A PRIMER ON THE JURISDICTION OF THE U.S. COURTS OF APPEALS (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 3d ed. 2023) available at: https://www.fjc.gov/content/379899/primer-jurisdiction-us-courts-appeals-third-edition). This origin explains the scattered references in the entries to “this Primer.”

When To Be Objectionable… And How Not To Be An Artless Clay-Brained Pignut, Leonard Niehoff

Articles

Having taught evidence for more than 30 years. I've become fairly good at predicting the questions students will ask, especially the questions that are hardest to answer. One of those typically comes after we've discussed how to object to evidence. We've worked through the basics: Stand up, speak up, say that you object, and briefly explain why. At this point a student almost always raises his or her and says something like this: "OK. I understand the how part. But when do I object?"