Litigation Commons^™

Antitrust, Vampires And Bloody Acquisitions, Theodosia Stavroulaki

Fordham Law Review

Private equity has rapidly seized control of large swaths of the U.S. healthcare system. This Essay argues that its takeover is not a story of efficiency or innovation but one of extraction. Drawing on a substantial body of research, it shows that private equity acquisitions are associated with rising healthcare costs, inferior care, reduced access to essential services, and deteriorating working conditions for physicians and nurses—harms that fall most heavily on marginalized communities.

These outcomes are not accidental. They stem from the private equity business model, which relies on leveraged buyouts, aggressive cost cutting, and roll-up strategies designed to generate …

Playing The Hermès Game: Quota Bags, Antitrust Law, And The Limits Of Consumer Protection In Luxury Markets, Madeleine Chou

William & Mary Business Law Review

Luxury fashion retail has become a behemoth of an industry. Through acquisitions and strong brand recognition, some brands have developed significant market power in the luxury retail space. Chief among these brands is Hermès, a luxury leather retail boutique known for its highly sought after quota bags, like the Birkin and the Kelly. Quota bags are handbags that can generally only be bought by customers who have developed a substantial purchase history and relationship with the brand. Through this sales model, Hermès has created what plaintiffs have alleged to be an antitrust tying scheme, in which the purchase of one …

Zombie Litigation: Claim Aggregation, Litigant Autonomy And Funders' Intermeddling, Maya Steinitz

Faculty Scholarship

The main debate surrounding litigation funding in recent years has focused on the question of disclosure of funding agreements.  While the issue is important, predominantly because of its effects on the course and outcome of individual cases, far more important are bigger, interrelated questions that have systemic effects on the civil justice system, the legal profession, and the nature of the attorney-client relationship.  The rise of litigation funding has had profound effects.  The subsequent rise of portfolio funding—which I here propose to  view as a new form of undisclosed and unregulated claim  aggregation—has broader-still effects including clients’ potential, and at …

The Status Of Private Covenants In Gross In Maine, Geoffrey Forney

Maine Law Review

In State v. Moosehead Mountain Resort, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court recently held that the State may enforce a restrictive covenant in gross. The decision appears to create new law by departing from the established rule in Maine, as laid down in an earlier decision in Brown v. Heirs of Fuller, that restrictive covenants in gross are not enforceable in equity. Although the holding in Moosehead Mountain is arguably narrow because the case only addressed the government's ability to enforce covenants in gross, the Law Court's omission of any reference to or discussion of its decision in Brown leaves open …

The Arbitration Web Ensnaring Every Consumer: The Next Evolution In Corporate Strategy To Compel Arbitration, Michael Conklin

Maine Law Review

This first-of-its-kind Article uses a novel hypothetical to explore the expanding role of compelled arbitration. The hypothetical involves numerous large corporations agreeing to cross-reference each other in their arbitration agreements, thus attempting to create a massive arbitration web ensnaring nearly every American and allowing corporations to compel arbitration against parties with whom they never interacted. This Article presents the case that courts might enforce such a scheme based on the judicial trend toward ever-expanding compelled arbitration jurisprudence, the docket-clearing incentives faced by judges, existing case law allowing some non-signatories to enforce arbitration agreements, the strong assumption in favor of arbitration, …

Curbing Common Benefit Fees, Matthew Lyness

Brooklyn Law Review

Multidistrict litigation (MDL) courts routinely use common benefit orders and fee assessments to compensate the attorneys who generate work product that benefits the broader plaintiff class. Courts’ largely unguided approach to setting assessment percentages—often justified through invocation of a court’s inherent authority—leaves participating counsel uncertain about their eventual recovery, invites arbitrary midstream changes, and risks windfalls unconnected to the actual utility of common benefit work product. This Note argues that in order to guarantee the continued efficiency of the MDL system, judges should adopt a standardized fee assessment framework that is predictable from the outset and proportionate to the ultimate …

Law School News: Isiah Dipina L'27: From Personal Experience To Policy Change 3-26-2026, Jane Govednik

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Cardozo Stands Alone With A+ In Trial Advocacy From Above The Law, Benjamin N. Cardozo School Of Law

Cardozo Law News Archive

Cardozo School of Law received an A+ in Trial Advocacy from Above the Law in its 2026 law school rankings, becoming the only law school in the nation to earn the highest distinction. The recognition highlights Cardozo's Intensive Trial Advocacy Program (ITAP), experiential curriculum, simulation courses, clinics, and competitive advocacy programs that prepare students for courtroom practice.

Law School News: Women In Law Leadership Lecture Welcomes Victims' Rights Attorney Carrie Goldberg To Roger Williams University School Of Law 3-19-2026, Mikayla Larguinha

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

The Vanishing Enforcer: Consumer Protection In An Era Of Dual Retrenchment, Alisher Juzgenbayev

Northwestern University Law Review

Recent developments, including reductions in the federal workforce, effective suspension of certain enforcement activities, and attempted centralization of independent agency rulemaking in the White House, have significantly weakened administrative agencies. This administrative retrenchment is concerning as private enforcement of a number of consumer protection statutes has been simultaneously curtailed through the Supreme Court’s decisions in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins and TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, which dramatically narrowed plaintiffs’ standing. These decisions rely in part on a vision of strong executive authority, positing that broad private standing conflicts with an Article II framework where a politically accountable President faithfully implements laws …

Litigating With No Receipts: How The Denial Of Access To Trial Transcripts Denies People The Opportunity To Access Justice, Madisen Zent

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Giving Tree Approach: Balancing Transparency And The Deliberative Process In Judicial Review, Anteo W. Chevere

Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1991 - )

No abstract provided.

Sea Changes In Sue-And-Settle Policy: The Tides Of Transparency And Expediency, Evan B. Fitzgerald

Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1991 - )

No abstract provided.

Inheriting The Mess: How Cercla Successor Liability Shapes The Landscape For Asset Purchase Deals, Liam N. Hudson

Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1991 - )

No abstract provided.

Zivotofsky V. Kerry Commentary From The Counsel Behind The Case, Jewish Law Students Association (Jlsa), Jewish Graduate Student Initiative (Jgsi)

2025–2026 Flyers

Join Alyza Lewin, President of Us Affairs for Combat Antisemitism Movement, and Akiva Shapiro, partner at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, as they share their experience litigating the landmark Supreme Court case Zivotofsky v. Kerry before the Supreme Court. In Zivotofsky, the court ruled that only thе president has the exclusive power to formally recognize a foreign sovereign and its territorial boundaries. This case paved the way for president Donald J. Trump to declare Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

The Jacob Burns Center For Ethics In The Practice Of Law And The Public Service Scholars Invite You To: Breakfast With Douglas Letter, Jacob Burns Center For Ethics In The Practice Of Law, Public Service Scholars, Douglas Letter

2026 Event Invitations

A conversation on constitutional litigation and public service in and outside of the federal government with Douglas Letter, Chief Legal Office at Brady United, and Professor Jessica Roth. Mr. Letter is former General Counsel for the U.S. House of Representatives under Speaker Nancy Pelosi. For 40 years, he worked as a public servant at the U.S Department of Justice. Mr. Letter also served in the White House Counsel's Office under President Bill Clinton.

Blockchain Evidence: How Smart Litigators Can Keep It Out At Trial, Alexandra Sahara

Fordham Law Review Online

A blockchain is a peer-to-peer decentralized ledger that records transactions by creating a secure, time-stamped chain of information. A network of nodes—computers that use a consensus mechanism and cryptography—stores this information, creating a long and permanent history of verified transactions—in other words, blocks on the blockchain. Blockchain records provide valuable, verifiable documentation of facts that can be used in litigation; this renders blockchain a more attractive archival option compared to standard electronic archives, which can be altered. As more blockchains emerge, litigators will need to verify their authenticity and reliability because valuable and sensitive evidence may only be accessible via …

Facing State-Created Danger In Facial Recognition Technology, Esha Jain

Washington Law Review

When the police wrongfully arrest someone, that person faces distinct harms. Various scholarship, news articles, and studies document that AI-powered facial recognition technology (FRT) disproportionately misidentifies individuals from marginalized racial groups when used irresponsibly. Many of those sources indicate that police reliance on FRT without adequate vetting results in wrongful arrests. Yet law enforcement continues to misuse FRT.

This Comment contends that the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 state-created danger doctrine offers a potential remedy for plaintiffs harmed by police reliance on FRT. To prevail under this doctrine, plaintiffs must prove affirmative conduct, deliberate indifference, and proximate causation. If successful, these …

Against The Drafter: An Empirical And Theoretical Analysis Of The Doctrine Of Contra Proferentem, Farshad Ghodoosi, Tal Kastner

Fordham Law Review

Contra proferentem, the enduring maxim that directs courts to interpret an ambiguity in a contract against its drafter, appears simple on its face. Although it might be best known as a fundamental principle of insurance law, contra proferentem figures in courts’ interpretation of a range of contract types. As an interpretive rule of thumb that parties can easily override with a simple contract provision, the doctrine and its boilerplate antidote seem to offer a straightforward means to facilitate private ordering—a central goal of contract law.

However, neither courts’ application of the doctrine in case law nor contract drafters’ treatment …

The History Of Multi-Member Commissions At The Founding, 1789-1840: New Evidence On Independent Agencies, Victoria Frances Nourse

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The executive removal power figures prominently on the Supreme Court’s current agenda. That agenda is beset, however, by a historical misunderstanding, when it comes to multi-member bodies, which too often are assumed to be modern creatures. This paper provides crucial new historical evidence showing that the Founders, indeed a who’s who list of Founders, approved and even sat on commissions in the Republic’s early years. In some cases, the Founders called these early commissions “independent,” deferred to their judgments as “final,” and demanded that the members be “impartial.” Given the vast discretion given these commissions, these characteristics are best described …