Litigation Commons^™

Semi-Confidential Settlements In Civil, Criminal, And Sexual Assault Cases, Saul Levmore, Frank Fagan

Cornell Law Review

Settlement is more likely if parties are free to set its terms, including a promise that these terms will remain secret between them. State sunshine-in-litigation laws work to defeat this incentive for confidentiality in order to protect third parties from otherwise unknown hazards. The intuition is that a wrongdoer should not be able to pay one plaintiff for silence at the expense of other victims. This Article begins by showing that the intuition is often wrong or overstated. A plaintiff who can assess a defendant’s vulnerability to future claims can extract a large enough settlement to provide substantial deterrence, and …

Expanding The Search For America's Missing Jury, Richard Lorren Jolly

Michigan Law Review

A review of Suja A. Thomas, The Missing American Jury: Restoring the Fundamental Constitutional Role of the Criminal, Civil, and Grand Juries.

Formalizing Chapter 9'S Experts, Laura N. Coordes

Michigan Law Review

Chapter 9 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code has many shortcomings. One of the most persistent, yet understudied, problems judges face in chapter 9 is also a problem that exists in other areas of bankruptcy law: the sheer difficulty of applying generalized plan confirmation standards to wildly different, highly specialized entities. In practice, judges have turned to experts—individuals well versed in municipal finance, mediation, and the particular debtor com-munity—to help overcome this problem in chapter 9. These experts often per-form critical roles in a municipal bankruptcy case, including conducting mediations, investigating the municipality’s finances, and even helping to craft the municipality’s …

Social Science Evidence In Charter Litigation: Lessons From Carter V Canada (Attorney General), Jocelyn Downie

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

In this paper, I offer the reflections of an academic who wandered well out of her wheelhouse. While I have graduate training in both philosophy and law, I am not an expert on the use of social science and humanities evidence in litigation. But, through the course of working on Carter v Canada (Attorney General), I had the opportunity to participate directly in the process of marshalling, preparing, analyzing, and critiquing the evidence. My hope is that, through this paper, I can bring a perspective that may be useful both for practitioners who might (or, I would say, should) be …

Promissory Estoppel's Avoidance Of Injustice And Measure Of Damages: The Final Frontier, Tory A. Weigand

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Defense Against The Dark Arts Of Copyright Trolling, Matthew Sag, Jake Haskell

Faculty Articles

In this Article, we offer both a legal and a pragmatic framework for defending against copyright trolls. Lawsuits alleging online copyright infringement by John Doe defendants have accounted for roughly half of all copyright cases filed in the United States over the past three years. In the typical case, the plaintiff’s claims of infringement rely on a poorly substantiated form pleading and are targeted indiscriminately at noninfringers as well as infringers. This practice is a subset of the broader problem of opportunistic litigation, but it persists due to certain unique features of copyright law and the technical complexity of Internet …

Aligning Incentives And Cost Allocation In Discovery, Jonathan R. Nash, Joanna M. Shepherd

Faculty Articles

Recent proposals to revise Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 to incorporate cost allocation of discovery have sparked considerable controversy. Advocates for reform argue that replacing the long-standing “producer-pays” presumption with something more akin to a “requester-pays” rule would better align economic incentives and reduce litigants’ ability to wield discovery as an instrument to force settlement. Opponents argue that such a reform would limit access to justice by saddling requesters with an ex ante burden of funding the opposition’s discovery.

In this Article, we explain that either a rule requiring both parties to share the costs of discovery (“cost-sharing rule”) …

Less Due Process Than Terrorists: An Analysis Of The Eric C. Conn Fiasco, Chelise L. Conn Greer

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

State Public-Law Litigation In An Age Of Polarization, Margaret H. Lemos, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

Public-law litigation by state governments plays an increasingly prominent role in American governance. Although public lawsuits by state governments designed to challenge the validity or shape the content of national policy are not new, such suits have increased in number and salience over the last few decades — especially since the tobacco litigation of the late 1990s. Under the Obama and Trump Administrations, such suits have taken on a particularly partisan cast; “red” states have challenged the Affordable Care Act and President Obama’s immigration orders, for example, and “blue” states have challenged President Trump’s travel bans and attempts to roll …

Brief Of Professors William Baude And Stephen E. Sachs As Amici Curiae In Support Of Neither Party, William Baude, Stephen E. Sachs

Faculty Scholarship

This case presents the question whether to overrule Nevada v. Hall, 440 U.S. 410 (1979). That question requires careful attention to the legal status of sovereign immunity and to the Constitution’s effect on it, which neither Hall nor either party has quite right. The Founders did not silently constitutionalize a common-law immunity, but neither did they leave each State wholly free to hale other States before its courts. While Hall’s holding was mostly right, other statements in Hall are likely quite wrong—yet this case is a poor vehicle for reconsidering them.

Hall correctly held that States lack a constitutional immunity …

Mdl V. Trump: The Puzzle Of Public Law In Multidistrict Litigation, Andrew D. Bradt, Zachary D. Clopton

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Litigation against the Trump Administration has proliferated rapidly since the inauguration. As cases challenging executive actions, such as the “travel ban,” multiply in federal courts around the country, an important procedural question has so far not been considered — Should these sets of cases be consolidated in a single court under the Multidistrict Litigation Act? Multidistrict litigation, or MDL, has become one of the most prominent parts of federal litigation and offers substantial benefits by coordinating litigation pending in geographically dispersed federal courts. Arguably, those benefits would also accrue if “public law” cases were given MDL treatment. There also are …

Midland Funding V. Johnson And The Pernicious Problem Of Stale-Debt Claims, Kara J. Bruce

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

It’S All Your Fault!: Examining The Defendant’S Use Of Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel As A Means Of Getting A “Second Bite At The Apple.”, Prentice L. White

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The United States Constitution provides individuals convicted of a crime with “a second bite at the apple.” The Sixth Amendment provides an avenue to appeal one’s conviction based on the claim of “ineffective assistance of counsel.” What were the Framers’ true intentions in using the phrase “effective assistance of counsel”? How does the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) of 1996 affect habeas corpus appeals? This article answers these questions through the eyes of Thomas—a fictional character who is appealing his murder conviction.

This article first looks at the history surrounding effective assistance of counsel and discusses the difficulties …

Opioid Addiction Litigation And The Wrongful Conduct Rule, Samuel Fresher

University of Colorado Law Review

The United States is facing an opioid addiction crisis. Can our civil courts help? This Comment explores obstacles to recovery for plaintiffs in tort suits against health care institutions and practitioners in opioid addiction litigation. It argues that defenses based on plaintiffs' wrongful conduct, which deny plaintiffs access to civil remedies due to their immoral or illegal conduct, should be eliminated or avoided in suits arising out of addiction. This Comment concludes that comparative fault principles adequately protect the interests of plaintiffs and defendants in drug addiction suits and advance important public policy goals. Finally, this Comment suggests that irrespective …

Courts As Information Intermediaries: A Case Study Of Sovereign Debt Disputes, Sadie Blanchard

Journal Articles

When foreign sovereigns default on their debt, creditors sometimes sue them. These creditors are sophisticated actors, and they sue even though courts can do little to force a sovereign to satisfy a judgment. Why do they sue? This Article argues that courts serve as information intermediaries that strengthen reputational enforcement in the international sovereign debt market. It shows, through a case study of sovereign debt defaults and disputes, three ways in which courts play this role. First, in hard cases, courts clarify reputational signals by publicly determining whether breach occurred. Second, through discovery and fact finding, they mitigate information asymmetries …

In Re Trulia: Revisited And Revitalized, Emma Weiss

Law Student Publications

"After an escalation in deal litigation that culminated with challenges to 95% of $100,000,000 deals, merger objection litigation that ends in disclosure-only settlements has become a topic of great concern. These cases are concerning because it seems implausible that 95% of all mergers are executed carelessly. The problematic cases all follow a similar pattern. When a merger is announced, multiple shareholder plaintiffs challenge the transaction in multiple jurisdictions. Plaintiffs and corporate defendants then quickly agree to a disclosure-only settlement, wherein the plaintiffs receive trivial supplemental disclosures about the transaction. In return, defendants receive a broad release from liability for future …

Waiver, Work Product, And Worry: A Case For Clarifying The Waiver Doctrine In Oklahoma, Mitchell B. Bryant

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Re Trulia: Revisited And Revitalized, Emma Weiss

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Table Of Contents, Jtaa Editors

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.

Masthead, Jtaa Editors

Suffolk Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy

No abstract provided.