Views from the Front lines: Observations by Chicago Lawyers About the System of Civil Discovery

This is the first in a series of articles that will report the results of a pilot effort to assess how well the system of civil discovery is working and to identify the principal problems which burden that system. The study revolves around interviews with 180 Chicago area litigators. This first essay, which synthesizes observations, insights, and complaints by interviewed attorneys, suggests that the world of civil discovery is not one monolithic whole, but consists of subworlds which exhibit clearly distinguishable features and problems. In addition to describing the principal problems which afflict the discovery system in its two major subworlds, the author reports what the interviewed lawyers suggest are the primary causes of those problems. While the litigators identify many ways in which the character of lawyering encumbers and disrupts the discovery process, they also locate much of the blame for the system's problems in the behavior of judges and the inefficiency of the judicial machinery. The interviews produced a dramatically widespread appeal to the courts to increase use of sanctions as a means of restraining discovery abuse.     

WTO Dispute Settlement and the Missing Developing Country Cases: Engaging the Private Sector

The poorest WTO member countries almost universally fail toengage as either complainants or interested third parties informal dispute settlement activity related to their market accessinterests. This paper focuses on costs of the WTO’s extendedlitigation process as an explanation for the potential but ‘missing’developing country engagement. We provide a positive examinationof the current system, and we catalogue and analyze a set ofproposals encouraging the private sector to provide DSU-specificlegal assistance to poor countries. We investigate the roleof legal service centres, non-governmental organizations, developmentorganizations, international trade litigators, economists, consumerorganizations, and law schools to provide poor countries withthe services needed at critical stages of the WTO’s extendedlitigation process. In the absence of systemic rules reform,the public-private partnership model imposes a substantial cooperationburden on such groups as they organize export interests, estimatethe size of improved market access payoffs, prioritize acrosspotential cases, engage domestic governments, prepare legalbriefs, assist in evidentiary discovery, and pursue the publicrelations effort required to induce foreign political compliance.     

Where Have All of the Pro‐Choice Lawyers Gone? An Analysis of Post‐Roe Reproductive Rights Lawyering

A body of scholarship attests to the importance of experienced litigators before the U.S. Supreme Court. In this article, we specifically consider the role of experienced litigators in the thirty years of reproductive rights litigation that followed Roe v Wade . To that end, we divide the lawyers by their pro-choice or pro-life affiliations and ask (1) how often individual lawyers appear before the Court in reproductive rights cases, (2) who the lawyers arguing these case before the Supreme Court are, and (3) how their participation has changed over time. We find changes in the pro-choice and pro-life bars that mirror the reproductive rights movement at large. Pro-choice groups, which once employed a stable of elite lawyers with significant expertise, have been decimated by the retirements of pro-choice counsel with no lawyers emerging to replace them. At the same time, the pro-life bar and pro-life groups appear to be developing a strong litigation campaign complete with experienced litigators.     

Fatal assumption

This article questions the assumption that mentally disabled individuals are regularly afforded competent counsel. It finds that such counsel is frequently not available and that our failure to challenge this assumption threatens to make illusory reform efforts by lawyers and mental health professionals alike. The presence of vigorous, independent counsel is critical, especially since legal rights are not self-executing. Such counsel serves an educative function in the entire process, seeks to assure the implementation of collateral legal rights, and avoids the “underidentification” of mental disability cases. These functions have become more important as the political and social climate has changed and as the subject matter has become more complex. A series of reform recommendations is offered to litigators, policy makers, judges, and legislators.     

美国驰名商标法则、TRIPS协议与香烟平装立法

驰名商标法则缘自《巴黎公约》,其国际应用由来已久,但是它在美国的司法适用却在绵延不断的判例中摇摆不定,迟迟无法得到承认。21世纪著名的Grupo案、ITC案和Fiat案虽能对这一问题起到一定的导向性作用,但是鉴于美国的立法程序、司法体制和国内产业利益方面的考量,法则的适用仍会是一个悬而未决的问题。有关国际商标制度变迁的另一个热点话题是香烟平装立法,澳大利亚政府作为此项规定的积极推行者,其法律遭到了多方企业和国家的反对,香烟平装立法因与TRIPS协议第8条、第20条的相互关系而备受关注,而WTO专家小组在此项争议解决中的最终态度也将直接影响各国的有关立法。     

Out of Place and Out of Line: Positioning the Police in the Regulation of Financial Markets

In November of 2003, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police launched a major initiative to combat securities fraud in Canada. Spurred by the Enron scandals in the United States, this involved the establishment of a series of specialized white-collar crime units with the express mandate of investigating serious cases of securities fraud and protecting investors from the worst of the market's abuses. After four years of activity, these units have produced little in the way of tangible results and have been widely criticized in legal, financial, and regulatory communities. Drawing on thirty-five interviews with members of these units, as well as outside stakeholders including Crown Attorneys and private litigators, this article examines the activities of these Integrated Market Enforcement Teams and highlights a number of barriers to the successful execution of their designated mandate. While factors such as procedural restrictions and limited expertise are certainly relevant, this analysis reveals that the IMET teams are more fundamentally constrained by their position in a broader regulatory field. Understanding this field, and its unique structure and politics, is essential in coming to terms with both the possibilities and limitations of securities enforcement in an increasingly complex financial world.     

论民事诉讼中的自认

自认作为一种完善的证据方式 ,对法院和当事人都有约束力。自认人包括当事人、诉讼代理人、共同诉讼人和第三人。自认对象是案件的主要事实。自认的基础是辩论主义。我国自认制度已初步建立 ,但还有不完善之处 ,应在吸收与借鉴国外先进立法的同时 ,结合我国立法和司法实际 ,制定出较为科学、合理的自认规则     

The jurisdictional bar provision: who is an appropriate relator?

After explaining the role of the qui tam litigation and demonstrating its importance to fighting Medicare fraud and abuse, this article provides a detailed explanation of various court interpretations of the jurisdictional bar provision of the False Claims Act, a common and contentious statutory pitfall for qui tam litigators. The author provides a thorough evaluation of the law among different circuits to assist litigators in choosing favorable jurisdictions to increase their likelihood of success.     

“She's Nobody's Child/the Law Can't Touch Her at All”: Seeking to Bring Dignity to Legal Proceedings Involving Juveniles

Inquiries into a range of issues involving juveniles in the psychiatric hospitalization and criminal trial process reveal that, regularly, juveniles are subject to shame and humiliation in all aspects of the legal system that relate to arrest, trial, conviction, and institutionalization, shame and humiliation that are often exacerbated in cases involving racial minorities and those who are economically impoverished. We contextualize them into the juvenile justice system, and look specifically at how this is reflected in the case law. We then consider these findings through the filters of therapeutic jurisprudence and international human rights laws, concluding that these approaches best remediate the current state of affairs and infuse this system with badly‐needed dignity.     

Human Rights in an Era of Neoliberal Globalization: The Alien Tort Claims Act and Grassroots Mobilization in Doe v. Unocal

This article examines a widely publicized corporate accountability and human rights case filed by Burmese plaintiffs and human rights litigators in 1996 under the Alien Tort Claims Act in U.S. courts, Doe v. Unocal , in conjunction with the three main theoretical approaches to analyzing how law may matter for broader social change efforts: (1) legal realism, (2) Critical Legal Studies (CLS), and (3) legal mobilization. The article discusses interactions between Doe v. Unocal and grassroots Burmese human rights activism in the San Francisco Bay Area, including intersections with corporate accountability activism. It argues that a transnationally attuned legal mobilization framework, rather than legal realist or CLS approaches, is most appropriate to analyze the political opportunities and indirect effects of Doe v. Unocal and similar litigation in the context of neoliberal globalization. Further, this article argues that human rights discourse may serve as a common vocabulary and counterhegemonic resource for activists and litigators in cases such as Doe v. Unocal , contrary to overarching critiques of such discourse that emphasize only its hegemonic potentials in global governance regimes.     

Challenges in Producing Defensible Environmental Chemistry Measurements for Litigation

The quality, integrity, interpretation and proper use of environmental forensic chemistry measurements should be a paramount concern to investigators, claims professionals and litigators. These issues are complicated for forensic chemists who often use nonstandard methods to discern unique chemical contaminant attributes. In addition, data fraud remains a constant, if not increasing, problem. The evolving interpretation of the Daubert ruling further complicates litigators' strategies in designing an effective forensic chemistry study which will be admissible in court. The purpose of this paper is to advise forensic investigators and litigators to the potential pitfalls in producing defensible environmental measurements, and provide perspectives for generating data that will not wither under scrutiny.     

Special Masters in the Pretrial Development of Big Cases: Potential and Problems

This article explores the advantages and disadvantages of referring discovery matters in complex cases to special masters. In the first section Brazil explains how the results of his earlier research into the discovery system exposed problems that the appointment of masters might help solve. He then describes the kinds of pretrial tasks and roles federal courts have assigned to special masters and the ways that using a master can expedite and rationalize the case development process. In the second half of the article, the author assesses the major objections to delegating judicial responsibilities to masters and the problems that frequent appointments might cause. Along the way, Brazil offers practical suggestions to judges about how to avoid potential difficulties and how to maximize the effectiveness of this increasingly popular procedure.     

法医精神病鉴定内容架构及评定要点解析

法医精神病鉴定在刑事、民事和行政三大诉讼领域中,以鉴定意见的证据形式发挥着重要作用。然而,与其重要性不相匹配的是,法医精神病鉴定学科发展尚不完善、专业发育尚不成熟,尚不能满足社会和民众的期盼和要求,甚至引发负面评价。为进一步促进法医精神病鉴定规范化、标准化建设。以法医精神病鉴定人的视角,结合法医精神病鉴定的内容架构,重点阐述法医精神病鉴定主要项目及其作用、评定要点,尤其聚焦刑事责任能力评定,阐明当前存在分歧和困难;简要介绍法医精神病鉴定人执业要求、法医精神病鉴定质量控制;以及简述法医精神病鉴定与临床精神医学实践的区别与联系。     

Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments, 4th Edn * Adrian Briggs and Peter Rees, Eds

This fourth edition, three years after the previous edition,overall is approximately 100 pages longer. The cause of thisgrowth is not hard to find; the blame is fairly laid at thedoor of the EU where its Conventions have been revised and re-revisedtime and time again and now the Regulation of the EU's Councilwhich has resulted in a variety of new absurdities having tobe placed on top of the national jurisdictional rules internalto the United Kingdom (and, presumably, to those of each otherMember States of the EU). This was the state of affairs at thetime of the third edition, leading the authors to state in theirintroductory chapter that litigators live, in the language ofthe Chinese curse, in interesting times. It is now three years later and in the fourth edition we haveanother layer     

Structuring Committee Decision-Making: Rules and Procedures in US State Legislatures

The rediscovery of rules and procedures as an important element for understanding legislative decision-making has become very apparent in recent summaries of research on Congress and European Parliaments. Institutional factors are now seen as critical factors that structure and restrict how individual legislators can go about their decision-making responsibilities. The goal of this article is to provide a landscape of the evolution of committee system structure in US state legislatures so that future research will be able to test current theories of institutional change. The major conclusion of this research is that US state legislatures have formalised the structure of their committee systems over the course of the twentieth century and that many similarities and few differences exist in committee system structure between US state legislative upper and lower chambers. Further, this article discovers that four distinct dimensions - property rights, codification of basic structure, internal democracy and minority party rights - of committee system structures exist in US state legislative chambers.     

Lawyer Advertising and the First Amendment

A current Supreme Court case concerning lawyer advertising, In re R.M.J., is analyzed in the context of a discussion of the diverse state regulations governing lawyer advertising and solicitation. The article considers the regulations in terms of their constitutionality, their tendency to impede effective advertising, and the effect they have on the legal profession's provision of information to potential clients about the nature, availability, and cost of legal services. Analysis of the major commercial speech cases, from Virginia State Board of Pharmacy to Central Hudson, indicates that many state rules infringe on attorneys' First Amendment rights.     

The Legal Dimensions of Whole-Process People’s Democracy

The concept of whole-process people’s democracy can be analyzed in terms of four the rule of law dimensions: continuous democracy, authentic democracy, extensive democracy and consultative democracy. Continuous democracy means that democracy provides a continuous and uninterrupted mechanism in terms of stage, time and space, which can ensure the continuous participation of the people in the management of state and social affairs. Authentic democracy is not only embodied creation of opportunities and conditions for the people to have more channels and methods of participation in the management of state and social affairs, but is also reflected in the process of democratic practice, including the protection of legitimate rights and interests of the minority. Extensive democracy means that the people are fully and deeply involved in the management of state and social affairs as well as their own affairs, from the operation of the state system to social life at the community level, and from pre-election to post-election. Consultative democracy is a means of realizing people’s democracy in the whole process. It applies consultation and seeks truth, aiming at building consensus. Moreover, it integrates various channels of consultation, and integrates democracy into all aspects of the work of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and government and in all aspects of the people’s political and social life.     

刑事和解实践中的行动者——法社会学视野下的制度变迁与行动者逻辑

真正的制度创造者实际上是社会上的各个利益主体和行动者,历史就是在各个主体的行动中推进的。在各个主体行动的利益考量、相互博弈等过程中显示出制度运作的最为真实的生存逻辑。在刑事和解的制度化进程中,首先,作为行动者之一的司法机关不但在宏观上成为刑事和解在我国制度化的一个重要推动力量,而且在微观上,即在刑事和解的具体个案中,其以国家法律的权威和强制力量作为后盾,从程序上决定着刑事和解程序的启动、进行,以及和解后的处理结果等;其次,如果说,司法机关决定着刑事和解程序的启动、运作方式以及和解成功后的处理方式,那么当事人的博弈和实践便决定着案件的发展方向;最后,在这一系列的事件和宏观进程中,民众以及学者也以自身的方式参与其中,成为刑事和解制度化的重要推动因素和催化剂。     

An Update on the New Federal Expert Discovery Rule: The Expert's Perspective

In December 2010, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 (FRCP 26) was amended to protect certain communications between a litigating counsel and its experts from discovery. The rule protects communications and draft expert reports and lays out new disclosure requirements for the so-called “treating physician” expert. Attorneys and experts who first read the rule commonly agreed that the rule would make expert discovery more streamlined and cost-effective while preserving an opposing party's right to obtain facts and data that were considered by the expert in formulating its opinion. However, many commentators on the amended FRCP 26 warned practitioners not to fully embrace the literal meaning of the rule until it was field tested by litigating attorneys and the courts had the opportunity to interpret a number of loosely defined terms during the course of resolving federal discovery disputes. Now, almost a year after the rule's first official publication, several courts have interpreted the key terms that appear in the rule and have expressed their interpretations in written opinions. The judicial holdings of these cases cover different aspects of the rule, and it is still too early to determine how the majority of federal courts will ultimately interpret it. However, a review of current case law indicates that the courts have, thus far, taken a practical and literal view of the amended rule and have not expanded or limited its scope beyond what was generally believed to be the intent of the rule. As a result, practitioners are still hopeful that the rule will make working with an expert more efficient and less cumbersome, to the benefit of experts, attorneys, and ultimately their clients.     

增强执政能力与提高参政水平的互动关系

历史证明,中国共产党的执政能力与民主党派的参政能力是相辅相成、不可分割的。中共的执政能力不强,民主党派的参政能力也不会强;反之,如果民主党派的参政能力不强,中共的执政能力也不会强。当中共提出加强执政能力建设问题时,如何提高参政议政水平,也成为作为参政党的各民主党派必须引起高度重视的重大问题。