University governance as a new topic of public discussion.
An unusual profile of Mary Anne Franks (kw)
Aggressive copyright litigation run amok. (fp)
USA Today's Matt Krantz quoting me on Warren Buffett joining Twitter. (LAC)
Private prisons? Why, sure! What could possibly go wrong? (kw)
TNR profiles Susan Crawford (kw)
Berkshire Hathaway is bigger than Warren Buffett. Manual of Ideas (LAC).
Guns don't shoot people, kitchen appliances shoot people (kw)
Via Glom, Sat Eve Post review of The Essays of Warren Buffett.
Jack Coffee on Bad Plaintiffs' Counsel in M&A Deals and What Must Be Done to Break Them
Subscribe to Law Talk
Concurring Opinions is a
multiple authored, general
interest legal blog.
(Data Source: Examining the Work of State Courts: An Analysis of 2009 State Court Caseloads; Federal Court Management Statistics: 2009)
(Update: Fixed a typo in the figure. See the comment thread.)
February 16, 2012 at 2:47 pm
Posted in: Civil Procedure
Print This Post
Tom J - February 16, 2012 at 2:55 pm
Let me offer this counterpoint: But federal court is sooooo much cooler.
anon - February 16, 2012 at 3:10 pm
Strictly speaking, if you weighed just civil filings instead of all filings, it’s more like 276,000 to 20 million. The 50 million traffic filings in state court seem hardly fair to consider for a civil procedure course.
Joe Miller - February 16, 2012 at 3:24 pm
Might help if the state court actions were commenCed, rather than being merely commenTed (as the figure reports).
Dave Hoffman - February 16, 2012 at 3:26 pm
Anon – a totally fair point. It’s still a 1:100 ratio (instead of 1:300). I don’t think the pie chart would look different, though.
Tom J – yes, and it has PACER!
Dave Hoffman - February 16, 2012 at 3:27 pm
Joe: That’s just mean.
I’ll fix it, but I’ll leave up your comment as a warning for people who try to make fun figures.
Danielle Citron - February 16, 2012 at 4:42 pm
But so many states follow FRCP and so it does make sense to teach it rather than any given state’s procedure (unless most students are likely to practice in a certain state). Interesting fact to know, of course.
Scott Dodson - February 16, 2012 at 4:42 pm
Interesting stat, Dave. I guess one might also want to know how many suits commenced in state court were removed to (and primarily litigated in) federal court.
Dave Hoffman - February 16, 2012 at 5:18 pm
Scott, as I understand the chart I linked to, it includes removed cases. So the # will be small. This chart suggests that the total is about 30,000 yearly. (http://www.uscourts.gov/Statistics/JudicialBusiness/JudicialBusiness.aspx?doc=/uscourts/Statistics/JudicialBusiness/2009/tables/S07Sep09.pdf)
Danielle: Sure, although the fact that state codes are written like the federal rules doesn’t mean that the state courts interpret them in the same way (i.e., Twombly, Celotex, discovery, etc.) And a some of what most of us teach in the civil procedure (basic) course is federal-court specific, like Federal SMJ, or Federal Claim/Issue Preclusion, or Class Action Practice.
Anon, good nurse! - February 17, 2012 at 1:57 pm
“Sure, although the fact that state codes are written like the federal rules doesn’t mean that the state courts interpret them in the same way (i.e., Twombly, Celotex, discovery, etc.) And a some of what most of us teach in the civil procedure (basic) course is federal-court specific, like Federal SMJ, or Federal Claim/Issue Preclusion, or Class Action Practice.”
Indeed. Sometimes the rules can actually be quite different. For example, despite the existence of language roughly analogous to the Article III case and controvery
requirement, most states construe their jurisdictional grant quite differently than do the federal courts. State taxpayer lawsuits, for instance, are widely permitted in state court (for those who have forgotten, they’re generally disallowed in federal court, with one exception).
Speaking of, anyone want to read a state taxpayer standing article?
Lemming of the BDA - February 21, 2012 at 5:08 pm
But, how many civil procedure scholars have litigated a case in state court (and doubly – how many did so as anything but a junior associate and/or while using local counsel)?
Danielle Citron - February 22, 2012 at 1:21 pm
This has given me much to chew on–as I teach the Rules part of Civil Procedure too. Interestingly, class actions is an area that demonstrates the importance of federal rules. CAFA ensures that more state classes will be removed to federal court–with its restrictive requirements. And Phillip Morris v. Scott seems likely to end up with even more federal oversight of state procedure. Perhaps civil procedure courses should more often include state practice and shave off a bit, perhaps from SMJ. I incorporate procedural due process into my CP I course, on the grounds that they need to know it and it pertains to state action that treads on constitutionally important rights with meaningful hearings. Great post and dialogue.
Email (will not be published), required
Website (if present)
Above the Law
Access to Justice
Chicago Law Faculty Blog
Crime & Federalism
Dorf on Law
The Faculty Lounge
Feminist Law Profs
Freedom to Tinker
Law and Humanities Blog
Law and Letters
Law Librarian Blog
Legal Profession Blog
Legal Theory Blog
Legal Times Blog
Brian Leiter's Law School Reports
Media Law Blog
Mirror of Justice
The Moderate Voice
National Security Advisors
Point of Law
Privacy and Security Training
Property Prof Blog
Red Tape Chronicles
The Right Coast
Schneier on Security
Sentencing Law and Policy
Talking Points Memo
Tech & Marketing Law
Truth on the Market
WorkPlace Prof Blog
WSJ Law Blog
The Yin Blog
© Concurring Opinions
Powered by WordPress