Litigation Commons^™

Better By The Dozen: Bringing Back The Twelve-Person Civil Jury, Steven Gensler, Lee Rosenthal, Patrick Higginbotham

Other Faculty Publications

A jury of 12 resonates through the centuries. Twelve-person juries were a fixture from at least the 14th century until the 1970s. Over 600 years of history is a powerful endorsement. So too are the many social-science studies consistently showing that a 12-person jury makes for a better deliberative process, with more predictable (and fewer outlier) results, by a more diverse group that is a more representative cross-section of the community. And yet, most federal judges today routinely seat civil juries without the full complement of 12 members. Why? Because in 1973 the United States Supreme Court said it was …

Preface, Jennie Lee Anderson

Lewis & Clark Law Review

On November 1–2, 2019, the Pound Civil Justice Institute and Lewis & Clark Law School together presented a unique academic symposium, addressing “Class Actions, Mass Torts, and MDLS: The Next 50 Years.” This symposium brought together distinguished legal academics, judges, and practitioners to consider the present status of class actions, mass torts, and multidistrict litigation in the United States, as well as possible future developments.

What Is A Fair Price For Objector Blackmail? Class Action Objectors And The 2018 Amendments To Rule 23, Elizabeth J. Cabraser, Adam N. Steinman

Lewis & Clark Law Review

As part of a symposium addressing what the next 50 years might hold for class actions, mass torts, and MDLs, this Article examines a recent amendment to Rule 23 that offers a new solution to the persistent problem of strategic objections. Most significantly, Rule 23 now requires the district judge to approve any payments made to class members in exchange for withdrawing or forgoing challenges to a class action settlement. Although the new provision is still in its infancy, it has already been deployed to thwart improper objector behavior and to bring for-pay objection practice out of the shadows. The …

Symposium Interview On Aggregate Litigation, Arthur R. Miller, Robert Klonoff

Lewis & Clark Law Review

Professor Arthur R. Miller joined Professor Robert Klonoff for a Q&A session at Lewis & Clark Law School.

The Halo Effect: Willful Infringement And Enhanced Damages In Light Of Halo, Rachel Weiner Cohen, Holly Victorson, Kellye Quirk

American University Law Review

The Supreme Court’s decision in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. overruled the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s longstanding Seagate test and empowered district courts to exercise their discretion in deciding whether to enhance damages for willful patent infringement. In the three years since the Halo decision, district courts have developed their own approaches to addressing willfulness allegations at the various stages of litigation, including pleading, summary judgment, trial, and post-trial. This Article observes trends in how district courts have addressed willfulness claims at each stage of litigation, highlights factors courts have considered when declining …

Rethinking The Impact Of Third-Party Funding On Access To Civil Justice, Victoria Sahani

Faculty Scholarship

Third-party funding indisputably puts a gold-weighted thumb on the scales of justice in favor of funded parties for two main reasons: (1) funded cases already tend to be calculable winners on the merits, and (2) third-party funders seeking a profit generally do not fund cases that are demonstrably likely to lose on the merits. Thus, we are left with both the promising potential for winners to be more likely to win with third-party funding and the alarming realization that not all winners are offered this same chance. This provokes a larger, fundamental question: If funders are picking winners among the …

From Trulia To Akorn: A Ride On The Roller Coaster Of M&A Litigation, Pierluigi Matera, Ferruccio M. Sbarbaro

Faculty Scholarship

In recent years, M&A litigation has experienced a dramatic increase, culminating with a peak in 2015, when over 96. of publicly announced mergers were challenged in a shareholder lawsuit. A large number of these lawsuits were frivolous and vexatious, since most claims were filed by plaintiffs' attorneys just to extract some fees with little effort. Some abusive practices emerged, signalling an alarming exploitation of the system. One scheme that plaintiffs' attorneys put in place was the disclosure-only settlement. There, the stockholders obtained some modest supplemental disclosures, the plaintiff's attorneys got significant fee awards from the defendant directors and the defendant …

Dispute Resolution In Pandemic Circumstances, George A. Bermann

Faculty Scholarship

The peaceful resolution of disputes is among the most important earmarks of a regime attached to the rule of law. Even in countries in which, for one reason or another, courts do not work especially well, civil peace is of paramount importance. The absence of effective institutions for the administration of justice between and among private parties would spell a high degree of social disorder.

Even in the absence of a crisis such as we are experiencing, justice systems face a number of challenges in this day and age. Does a jurisdiction have a sufficient number of persons qualified to …

Choice Of Law As Extraterritoriality, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This contribution to Resolving Conflicts on the Law: Essays in Honour of Lea Brilmayer (published under the title Choice of Law as Geographic Scope Limitation) argues that the choice-of-law question commonly addressed by state and foreign courts is conceptually identical to the question addressed by federal courts in determining whether a federal statute applies to a dispute having foreign elements. The latter question is clearly understood today to relate to the statute’s territorial scope. State courts have long conceptualized the choice-of-law question in the same way. Faced with a state statute addressing the issue before it and phrased in …

How Much Do Expert Opinions Matter? An Empirical Investigation Of Selection Bias, Adversarial Bias, And Judicial Deference In Chinese Medical, Chunyan Ding

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

This article investigates the nature of the operation and the role of expert opinions in Chinese medical negligence litigation, drawing on content analysis of 3,619 medical negligence cases and an in-depth survey of judges with experience of adjudicating medical negligence cases. It offers three major findings: first, that both parties to medical negligence disputes show significant selection bias of medical opinions, as do courts when selecting court-appointed experts; second, expert opinions in medical negligence litigation demonstrate substantial adversarial bias; third, courts display very strong judicial deference to expert opinions in determining medical negligence liability. This article fills the methodological gap …

“Fair Enough”? Revising The Yellowstone Injunction To Fit New York’S Commercial Leasing Landscape And Promote Judicial Economy, Gabriel W. Block

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

The Yellowstone injunction is an equitable remedy that tolls any applicable cure period and gives tenants a better opportunity to maintain their leasehold when they have defaulted under their lease. The remedy is available to commercial tenants in New York City and to commercial and residential tenants throughout the State. This Note examines the Yellowstone injunction in the context of New York City’s commercial tenants, who employ it most frequently and benefit most from its protections. This Note examines the development and application of the Yellowstone injunction and proposes changing the doctrine to exclude cases of monetary defaults and expired …

Between Scylla And Charybdis: Maritime Liens And The Bankruptcy Code, Ian T. Kitts

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

Federal courts have had trouble fitting maritime law into the bankruptcy scheme created by the Bankruptcy Code (the Code). Particularly troublesome have been vessel-arrest proceedings that are underway when the vessel’s owner files for bankruptcy. Prior to the enactment of the Code, courts applied the doctrine of custodia legis to decide whether the admiralty or the bankruptcy court would administer the vessel. Since the Code was enacted, courts have generally held that the bankruptcy court gained control. A recent Ninth Circuit decision, however, split with other circuits and seems to have revived custodia legis. This Note argues that the Ninth …

Prior Art In The District Court, Stephen Yelderman

Notre Dame Law Review

This Article is an empirical study of the evidence district courts rely upon when invalidating patents. To construct our dataset, we collected every district court ruling, verdict form, and opinion (whether reported or unreported) invalidating a patent claim over a six-and-a-half-year period. We then coded individual invalidity rulings based on the prior art supporting the court’s decision, observing 3320 invalidation events relying on 817 distinct prior art references.

The nature of the prior art relied upon to invalidate patents is relevant to two distinct sets of policy questions. First, this data sheds light on the value of district court litigation …

Extending United States V. Mendoza: Why Defensive Nonmutual Issue Preclusion Is Unavailable Against The Federal Government, Jake E. Goodman

Cornell Law Review

Imagine a situation where the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is Looking to enforce the antifraud provision of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against two different companies, arising out of the same transaction. Now suppose the SEC sues Company A ftrst. However, the court finds no violation based on the factual determinations of the transaction and renders a judgment refusing to impose liability against Company A. Unsatisfied, the SEC decides to sue Company B under the same provision. Company B, however, believes the factual issues were already litigated and determined against Company A and wants to preclude relitigation …

Improving Access To Justice: Do Contingency Fees Really Work?, Allan C. Hutchinson

Articles & Book Chapters

While not touted as a universal panacea for access problems, contingency fees have received general praise as an important and justice-improving initiative. By back-loading the payment of legal fees, the assumption is that the interests of clients and litigants will be better served. I challenge that received wisdom. While the rise of contingency fee agreements between lawyers and clients has increased the number of people who can afford lawyers and make successful claims, the more challenging issue is whether that increase is being achieved at too high a price to clients and litigants – while more people are able to …

Challenging H-1b Denials In Federal Courts: Trends And Strategies, Hun Lee, Stephen W. Yale-Loehr

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The denial rate for H-1B petitions has quadrupled over the past few years, increasing from six percent in fiscal year (FY) 2015 to twenty-four percent in FY 2018. After President Trump issued his ‘‘Buy American and Hire American’’ executive order in April 2017, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has effectively raised the standard of proof on H-1B petitions.

USCIS has used several reasons to deny H-1B petitions, including claims that the employer failed to show that a position qualifies as a ‘‘specialty occupation,’’ impermissibly assigned employees to third-party worksites, or failed to pay the required wage.

Under USCIS’s recent …

Protecting Health Information In Utero: A Radical Proposal, Luke Isaac Haqq

Journal of Law and Policy

This Article introduces an underappreciated space in which protected health information (“PHI”) remains largely unprotected, a fact that will become only more problematic as clinical medicine increasingly turns to genomics. The past decade has seen significant advances in the prevention of birth defects, especially with the introduction of clinical preconception, prenatal, and neonatal genomic sequencing. Parental access to the results of embryonic and fetal clinical sequencing is critical to reproductive autonomy; results can provide parents with important considerations in determining whether to seek or avoid conception, as well as in deciding whether to carry a pregnancy to term. The information …

Increasing Lapses In Data Security: The Need For A Common Answer To What Constitutes Standing In A Data Breach Context, Aaron Benjamin Edelman

Journal of Law and Policy

As the number of data breaches continues to rise in the United States, so does the amount of data breach litigation. Many potential plaintiffs who suffered as victims of data breaches, however, find themselves in limbo regarding the issue of standing before a court because of a significant split on standing determinations amongst the federal circuit courts. Thus, while victims of data breaches oftentimes have their personal information fall into the hands of nefarious characters who intend to use the information to a victim’s detriment, that may not be enough to provide victims a right to sue in federal court …

Pay Now, Play Later?: Youth And Adolescent Collision Sports, Vivian E. Hamilton

Faculty Publications

The routine and repeated head impacts experienced by athletes in a range of sports can inflict microscopic brain injuries that accumulate over time, even in the absence of concussion. Indeed, cumulative exposure to head impacts—not number of concussions—is the strongest predictor of sports-related degenerative brain disease in later life. The observable symptoms of disease appear years or decades after initial injury and resemble those of other mental-health conditions such as depression and dementia. The years-long interval between earlier, seemingly minor, head impacts and later brain disease has long obscured the connection between the two.

Risk of injury differs across demographics, …

Follow The Money? A Proposed Approach For Disclosure Of Litigation Finance Agreements, Maya Steinitz

Faculty Scholarship

Litigation finance is the new and fast-growing practice by which a non-party funds a plaintiff’s litigation either for-profit or for some other motivation. Some estimates placed the size of the litigation finance market at 50–100 billion dollars. Both proponents and opponents of this newly -emergent phenomenon are in agreement that the it is the most important development in civil justice of this era. Litigation finance is already transforming civil litigation at the level of the single case as well as, incrementally, at the level of the civil justice system as a whole. It is also beginning to transform the way …