January 25, 2013
Federal Court Management Statistics for Fiscal Year 2012 Released
From Third Branch News:
Federal court statistical profiles are available for the nation’s 12 courts of appeal and 94 district courts for fiscal year 2012, the 12-month period ending September 30, 2012.
Federal Court Management Statistics also provides national totals for the appellate and district courts, allowing the statistical totals of each individual court to be compared to a national average.
The tables present data based on the number of authorized judgeships, and provide rankings among the appellate and district courts.
Note that the Caseload Management Statistics do not include the Federal Judicial Caseload Statistics or the Judicial Business of the U.S. Courts report for FY 2012. Those figures have not yet been released.
January 24, 2013
Meier on Summary Judgment (Again!)
Professor Luke Meier has recently posted to SSRN his paper “Probability, Confidence, and Matsushita: The Misunderstood Summary Judgment Revolution.”
The paper can be found here:
The paper argues that Matsushita has been erroneously interpreted in requiring a shift of power from jury to judge.
January 23, 2013
Lahav on Klerman on Personal Jurisdiction
Now available on the Courts Law section of JOTWELL is an essay by Alexandra Lahav (Connecticut) entitled Economic Analysis of Personal Jurisdiction. It reviews an article by Daniel Klerman (Southern California), Personal Jurisdiction and Product Liability, 85 S. Cal. L. Rev. ___ (forthcoming 2013).
January 22, 2013
Lederman: Article III Standing in the SCOTUS Same-Sex Marriage Cases
Over at SCOTUSblog, Prof. Marty Lederman (Georgetown) has a deep dive into the Article III standing issues in Hollingsworth v. Perry (docket no. 12-144) and United States v. Windsor (docket no. 12-307). Links to the entire series—Understanding standing: The Court’s Article III questions in the same-sex marriage cases—below:
January 21, 2013
SCOTUS Cert Grants on SLUSA: The Troice Troika
On Friday the Supreme Court granted certiorari in three cases on the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA). At issue is the scope of SLUSA’s 15 U.S.C. § 78bb(f)(1)(A), which blocks class actions based on state law that involve “a misrepresentation or omission of a material fact in connection with the purchase or sale of a covered security.” Links below:
Chadbourne & Parke v. Troice, No. 12-79:
Willis of Colorado Inc. v. Troice, No. 12-86:
Proskauer, Rose v. Troice, No. 12-88
For more coverage, see: