Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Jurisdiction, Merits, and Procedure: Thoughts on Dodson's Trichotomy

Earlier, we linked to Scott Dodson's Bowles article in the Northwestern Colloquy.   The latest Colloquy piece from Howard Wasserman  continues the series on the boundaries between jurisdiction, merits, and procedure.  It begins:

In his outstanding article, In Search of Removal Jurisdiction,  Professor Scott Dodson delineates the appropriate boundaries between rules of subject matter jurisdiction and rules of judicial procedure in the context of removal time limits, and argues that we must develop a “broader understanding of the interrelationship and boundaries among the trichotomy of jurisdiction, procedure, and merits.”  He also suggests that the strands of each pair in the triangle interact in distinct ways and require distinct rules for separating one from the other.  Having sought in recent work to define, clearly and cleanly, boundaries between subject matter jurisdiction and the substantive merits of federal claims of right, I agree as to both points.

--RR

February 20, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

1404(a) and the Fifth Circuit

We posted here about the In re Volkswagen of America Inc. opinion--a Fifth Circuit panel opinion that made it easier to obtain a 1404(a) transfer by eliminating the requirement that the balance of convenience and justice substantially weigh in favor of transfer.  The Fifth Circuit has decided to rehear the case en banc.  The Fifth Circuit's decision may have a significant impact on the little Texas town of Marshall with its Fire Ant Festival and massive federal docket of some of the world's most important IP litigation because, as this article discusses, the Federal Circuit will probably apply the Fifth Circuit's 1404(a) transfer standard.--Counseller         

February 19, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, February 18, 2008

Twombly's Impact: Interview with Kendall Hannon

Click the link at the bottom of this post to listen to my interview with Kendall Hannon about the results of a survey he conducted on Twombly's impact on 12(b)(6) dismissal rates.  The results are interesting and the work Kendall put into the project is staggering.  Kendall is the incoming EIC of the Notre Dame Law Review, and, based on his Twombly project, we can expect great things from him in the future.  The results of his survey will be published as a case note in the Notre Dame Law Review but you can read his paper--Much Ado About Twombly?  A Study on the Impact of Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly on 12(b)(6) Motions--in its entirety here.  Another thank you to Scott Dodson for leading us to Kendall's valuable resource.--Counseller

Download hannon_twombly_interview.MP3

 

February 18, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)