Litigation Commons^™

Class Actions, Thomas M. Byrne, Stacey Mcgavin Mohr

Mercer Law Review

During 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit continued to address a familiar set of recurring issues in contemporary class action law, including the scope of jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), class action settlement controversies, and the impact of arbitration agreements on class actions.

Redefining Roles And Duties Of The Transactional Lawyer: A Narrative Approach, Lori D. Johnson

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Article posits that narrative theory can assist the transactional lawyer in walking this tightrope effectively and ethically.

Specifically, this Article proceeds to show that the use of narrative techniques, specifically those proposed by Walter Fisher, can assist transactional lawyers: (1) in understanding their clients’ goals more fully; (2) in more effectively advancing their clients’ goals through persuasion; and (3) in creating complete, holistic documents to govern the proposed deal. As such, the appropriate use of narrative techniques and understanding of narrative theory can enhance the skills of transactional lawyers, and improve client outcomes.

This Article proceeds in three …

Rwu First Amendment Blog: David Logan's Blog: Discovering Trump 06-22-2018, David A. Logan

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

Malice Maintenance Is “Runnin’ Wild”: A Demand For Disclosure Of Third-Party Litigation Funding, Anusheh Khoshsima

Brooklyn Law Review

Third-party funding (TPLF) is when a nonparty, who does not have a direct stake in the litigation, funds a lawsuit. There are varying motivations that drive TPLF arrangements—including investors offering loans to receive a portion of the settlement or public interest groups sponsoring impact litigation. This note discusses a specific mode of TPLF that is motivated by a personal interest in the lawsuit rather than monetary gain, referred to as “malice maintenance.” At common law, maintenance was prohibited to prevent powerful and wealthy individuals form taking advantage of the court system. The majority of states today, however, permit at least …

The Summit For Civil Rights: Mission, Structure, And Initial Outcomes, Myron Orfield, William Stancil

Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality

No abstract provided.

Segregation Now, Segregation Tomorrow, Segregation Forever?, Elizabeth K. Julian

Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality

No abstract provided.

Litigation Committee Charge, Litigation Committee Summit For Civil Rights

Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality

No abstract provided.

The Husky Case: Fraud, Bankruptcy, And Veil Piercing, Harvey Gelb

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

A recent Supreme Court decision, Husky International Electronics, Inc. v. Ritz, explores the meaning of the word “fraud” under a federal bankruptcy statutory section. That section uses the term “actual fraud,” and bears upon the question of whether a particular debt should be denied a discharge. The Court’s approach in defining fraud affords guidance to the question of defining fraud under other statutes. The Husky case also raised a veil piercing issue to be dealt with on remand. That issue involved the application of Texas statutory law precluding veil piercing in cases brought by contract creditors unless they were victims …

A Fork In The Road: Issues Surrounding The Legality Of Mandatory Class Action Waivers In Arbitration Agreements, Brielle Oshinsky

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

Recently, federal circuit courts have presented contrasting outcomes regarding the legality of mandatory class action waivers in arbitration agreements. More specifically, these outcomes vary on whether such waivers violate the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), and importantly, whether it is possible for these statutes to coexist with the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The Second, Fifth, and Eighth Circuits have previously held that the act of an employer requiring employees to sign class action waivers in arbitration agreements posed no violation to either the FLSA or the NLRA. However, in May 2016, the Seventh …

Shareholder Litigation And Corporate Disclosure: Evidence From Derivative Lawsuits, Thomas Bourveau, Yun Lou, Rencheng Wang

Research Collection School Of Accountancy

Using the staggered adoption of universal demand (UD) laws in the United States, we study the effect of shareholder litigation risk on corporate disclosure. We find that disclosure significantly increases after UD laws make it more difficult to file derivative lawsuits. Specifically, firms issue more earnings forecasts and voluntary 8-K filings, and increase the length of management discussion and analysis (MD&A) in their 10-K filings. We further assess the direct and indirect channels through which UD laws affect firms' disclosure policies. We find that the effect of UD laws on corporate disclosure is driven by firms facing relatively higher ex …

Litigating Trauma As Disability In American Schools, Taylor N. Mullaney

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

No abstract provided.

When Should Force Directed Against A Police Officer Be Justified Under The Maine Criminal Code? - Toward A Coherent Theory Of Law Enforcement Under The Code's Justification Provision, F. Todd Lowell

Maine Law Review

In State v. Clisham, the Law Court unanimously found that section 104(1) of the Maine Criminal Code operated to justify the use of non-deadly force by a private citizen seeking to prevent an illegal search of his house by police officers. This Comment will focus on the justification provisions of the Maine Criminal Code as they relate to law enforcement practices and will examine how the Law Court's most recent decision interpreting one of the provisions affects that relationship. This Comment will argue that the policy underlying the justification provisions mandates that the justification defense be denied to persons responding …

Confronting Silence: The Constitution, Deaf Criminal Defendants, And The Right To Interpretation During Trial, Deirdre M. Smith

Maine Law Review

For most deaf people, interactions with the hearing community in the absence of interpretation or technological assistance consist of communications that are, at most, only partly comprehensible. Criminal proceedings, with the defendant's liberty interest directly at stake, are occasions in which the need for deaf people to have a full understanding of what is said and done around them is most urgent. Ironically, the legal “right to interpretation” has not been clearly defined in either statutory or case law. Although the federal and state constitutions do not provide a separate or lesser set of rights for deaf defendants, their situation …

Clarifying The “Probate Lending” Debate: A Response To Professors Horton And Chandrasekher, Jeremy Kidd Ph.D.

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

The debate over third-party funding of legal claims just got more interesting. The debate already had plot twists, such as free-market scholars lining up in opposition to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and alongside proplaintiff scholars who they oppose in tort reform debates. Now add to the mix a recent paper by Professors Horton and Chandrasekher that introduced an entirely new angle to the debate: funding of probate disputes. Now that this parallel area of funding has been identified, comparing and contrasting probate funding with litigation funding should illuminate the incentives that funders/recipients face in both scenarios. By pointing out …

How Meyer V. Uber Could Demonstrate That Uber And The Sharing Economy Fit Into Antitrust Law, Nicholas Andrew Passaro

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

Recently, Uber driver (and former Uber CEO) Travis Kalanick has been sued under antitrust laws. The plaintiffs argue that Mr. Kalanick and the other Uber drivers have engaged in a price fixing arrangement that violates §1 of the Sherman Act. The case, Meyer v. Uber (originally Meyer v. Kalanick), is still being litigated. This Comment will analyze each side’s potential arguments and will ultimately conclude that the court should find Uber drivers not guilty of a Sherman Act violation. This determination will be based on: the merits of the various arguments, how such a holding would fit within the …

A (Thigh) Gap In The Law: Addressing Egregious Digital Manipulation Of Celebrity Images, Jessica L. Williams-Vickery

Georgia State University Law Review

In 2012, world-renowned supermodel Coco Rocha agreed to be photographed for the cover of one of Elle’s magazine publications, Elle Brazil. Rocha posed for the pictures in a dress with significant cutouts, covered only by a sheer layer of skin-toned fabric. In keeping with her firm policy of no full or partial nudity, Rocha wore a bodysuit underneath the dress to limit her exposure. When Elle published the magazine, the final product shocked Rocha; the magazine had altered the image to remove her bodysuit, giving the impression Rocha had shown more skin than she in fact had. Rocha took to …

Suing For Spanish: Puerto Ricans, Bilingual Voting, And Legal Activism In The 1970s, Ariel Arnau

Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects

This dissertation examines how the legal activism of a Puerto Rican group of activist-lawyers and community members contributed to the reshaping of voting law and language policy during the 1970s. The Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF) coordinated a series of lawsuits in Chicago, New York City, and Philadelphia during the early 1970s. The decisions in these lawsuits provided the legal framework to rewrite federal voting rights law during the Voting Rights Act (VRA) reauthorization hearings in 1975. These cases resulted in vastly expanded opportunity to vote for all language minorities in the United States. These civil rights …

United States V. Osman: Including Future Therapy Costs In Mandatory Restitution Awards Is The Growing Trend Among Circuits, But Is It Wise?, Mary Theresa Mahfoud

Mercer Law Review

Mandatory restitution awards for child victims of sex crimes and child pornography now include future therapy costs. This trend, while theoretically increasing the amount of restitution awarded to the victim, can have unintended harmful consequences. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in United States v. Osman, as a matter of first impression, upheld a restitution order under the Mandatory Restitution for Sexual Exploitation of Children Act (Mandatory Restitution Act) to include future therapy expenses.

William Edward Osman pleaded guilty in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida to the possession, production, …

Take This Job And Shove It: The Pragmatic Philosophy Of Johnny Paycheck And A Prayer For Strict Liability In Appalachia, Eugene "Trey" Moore Iii

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming

When Courts Run Amuck: A Book Review Of Unequal: How America's Courts Undermine Discrimination Law By Sandra F. Sperino And Suja A. Thomas (Oxford 2017), Theresa M. Beiner

Texas A&M Law Review

In Unequal: How America’s Courts Undermine Discrimination Law (“Unequal”), law professors Sandra F. Sperino and Suja A. Thomas provide a point-by-point analysis of how the federal courts’ interpretations of federal anti-discrimination laws have undermined their efficacy to provide relief to workers whose employers have allegedly engaged in discrimination. The cases’ results are consistently pro-employer, even while the Supreme Court of the United States—a court not known for being particularly pro-plaintiff—has occasionally ruled in favor of plaintiff employees. The authors suggest some reasons for this apparent anti-plaintiff bias among the federal courts, although they do not settle on a particular reason …