THE “EYE OF THE BEHOLDER”: PROFESSIONAL OPINIONS ABOUT THE BEST INTERESTS OF A CHILD

Child custody evaluations (CCEs) are a central feature of parenting litigation in many North American jurisdictions. However, there has been little recent research comparing CCE decisions about children's interests with decisions made by judges. This article presents empirical research about the extent to which Ontario judges accept custody and access recommendations from CCEs employed by Ontario's Office of the Children's Lawyer. The central finding was that the judges fully agreed with the CCEs only about half of the time. Possible explanations for this finding are explored, the most salient of which is the effect of delay in Ontario family litigation. In conclusion, the article suggests that a more efficient synthesis of the judicial and CCE decision‐making processes might be more consonant with the best interests of children involved in these disputes.     

From litigator to researcher: the burdens and benefits of moving between the profession and the academy

A researcher who understands litigation practice and is connected to the profession has advantages in terms of accessing and interpreting the litigation setting. However, the knowledge and connections complicate relationships to research participants. This article considers a research method designed to provide insight into how litigants in person conduct litigation and how the professional participants (lawyers, court staff and judges) respond to them. The researcher’s previous roles of judges’ clerk and lawyer helped secure access and understanding but created issues with recognising and managing participant reactivity, maintaining critical distance, as well as an ethical and personal struggle in watching a legal case heading for disaster. The research site, the ‘large village’ of New Zealand with its tight-knit closely networked legal profession, compounded these issues. The article concludes that despite these difficulties, watching litigation with anthropological curiosity resulted not only in insights about the research questions but also the importance in litigation practice of engaging with the client’s social world.     

Policing Medicaid and Medicare managed care: the role of courts and administrative agencies

The much-publicized 2000 case of Frew v. Gilbert, in which a federal judge castigated the State of Texas for deficiencies in its Medicaid program, brought renewed attention to the issue of regulating the quality of care in Medicaid and Medicare HMOs. Frew and other recent cases highlight both the promise and the pitfalls of relying on courts to correct deficiencies in public managed care programs. This article argues that while litigation over inadequacies in Medicare and Medicaid managed care can serve an important signaling function in alerting agencies and legislatures about the need for reform, the role of the courts in policing public managed care is circumscribed by several constraints. Barriers to class action litigation and differences in the institutional capacities of courts and administrative agencies mean that litigation is best viewed as a supplement, not an alternative, to a renewed commitment to strong quality monitoring on the part of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and state Medicaid agencies.     

INDEPENDENT LEGAL REPRESENTATION FOR CHILDREN IN CUSTODY AND ACCESS CASES

In this article, the author discusses the role of children's representation in custody and access cases, and in particular, considers whether the Stobridge case came to a correct determination of the most appropriate role for children's counsel. The three possible modes of child representation are considered: amicus curiae, litigation guardian, and advocate. The role of amicus curiae is rejected because it does not provide the child with an opportunity to be heard, thus defeating the purpose of representation. The role of litigation guardian is rejected on the basis that the guardian does not advocate the child's interests unless they are consistent with that of the guardian. The author concludes that Stobridge was correctly decided, and that the role of children's counsel in a custody or access dispute in which the children are capable of directing counsel should be that of advocate.     

Inquisitorial Adjudication and Institutional Constraints in Chinese Civil Justice

Based on participatory observations of trials and extensive interviews with judges, this article examines the operation patterns of the civil justice process in China and explores the underlying reasons behind. It finds that, despite the reform efforts placing more responsibility on the litigants, the Chinese civil proceeding remains largely inquisitorial. The decline of out‐court investigation is evident, yet judges rely on a limited form of cross‐examination aimed to obtain oral testimony that can be used to justify a decision. This kind of judge‐initiated questioning becomes an inexpensive substitute for the previously labor‐intensive court investigation. The article further argues that the judges do not adjudicate based on whatever evidence presented by the litigation parties, a change mainly attributed to the institutional constraints to which the judges are subject. They respond to the incentives by handling cases efficiently with the minimum possibility of reversal and complaint. The article concludes by offering theoretical implications on the study of comparative legal process more generally.     

民事诉讼生成权利规制探析——以“人脸识别第一案”为切入点

2019年11月1日,媒体称之为"中国人脸识别第一案"的浙江杭州理工大学副教授郭兵起诉杭州野生动物世界案,正式在杭州市富阳区人民法院立案。近两年来新兴案件如"代孕子女监护权案""冷冻胚胎案"频发,社会对司法的期待很高,民事诉讼对于新兴权利的权利诉求要做出回应,而如何回应及回应的限度就涉及到对法官裁判的规制上面。从程序法角度理解的规制,是由程序启动时的起诉受理、经由程序续行的审理过程、至判决达成三维角度对通过诉讼生成权利进行的规制。     

Summary judgment in intellectual property litigation--the three of Harts

Legal context. The popular image of litigation is one of anoften long and expensive full trial. However, better case managementmeans that courts in the United Kingdom increasingly deal withdisputes at an early stage, by striking out claims that haveno genuine chance of success and by giving summary judgmentagainst defendants whose defences have no hope of succeeding.These procedures, detailed under the Civil Procedure Rules,are frequently invoked in intellectual property disputes. Unlikefull trials, which are normally heard before a specialist intellectualproperty judge, applications for summary judgment and strikingout are frequently heard by judges in the Chancery Divisionwho may have little experience of the area. Key points. This article considers the advantages and disadvantagesof deploying non-specialist judges, reviewing in particularthree decisions of a non-specialist judge, Mr Justice Hart.It suggests that a specialist judge might have reached a differentconclusion in at least one of these decisions. It also questionsthe policy issue of refusing to strike out a claim that, onthe law as it currently stands, has no chance of success wherethe intention is that the claimant be given the opportunityto invite the trial court to evolve a change in the law throughprecedental development. Practical significance. At a time when there is a strong demandfor the administration of justice to be both effective and swift,the twin facility of entering summary judgment and strikingout is likely to remain attractive and popular with intellectualproperty litigants. However, it is a facility that should notbe abused. The employment of non-specialist judges for the purposeof determining whether that facility should be utilised mayproduce results that, if justifiable, may run counter to theintuition of those who specialise in the field. Accordingly,judicial practice in this regard should be carefully monitoredand reviewed if predictability and consistency of decision-makingis to prevail.     

ASSESSING MUTUAL PARTNER-ABUSE CLAIMS IN CHILD CUSTODY AND ACCESS CASES

This article explores issues associated with mutual claims of domestic violence in the context of research on gender and violence, and in the context of litigation tactics commonly employed by perpetrators in child custody and access cases. Quotations from parents involved in such cases illustrate why accurate assessment of mutual cliams requires complete information about social context and the analysis of patterns of domination, power and control in the relationship over time. Recent developments in Canadian law ought to enhance the ability of judges to take such evidence into account. The article aims to provide a lens through which to understand and assess such cases.     

FAMILY COURT REFORM IN SIX PENNSYLVANIA COUNTIES

This article describes judicial behavior in local family court reform movements, vis-à-vis six case studies, as part of a larger study on the implementation of court-connected custody mediation in Pennsylvania. Research findings provide new insight into the initiation of change by judges at the local court level. When motivated to do so, family court judges in Pennsylvania bring about local reform independently and expeditiously. Judges who desire alternative methods to litigation of custody disputes implement court change with few organizational constraints: They decide how and when reform is to be implemented, and they assign nonjudicial professionals to assist in reform implementation. Finally, judges establish their own criteria for assessing the success of change initiated. Throughout reform movements, judges take on a variety of roles in bringing about change—first as reform activists, then as leaders in reform movements, and finally, as advisors in reform implementation. These case studies reveal the diversity in judicial style when court change is implemented; at the same time, similar court goals and objectives are obtained.     

ROCK‐PAPER‐SCISSORS: PLAYING THE ODDS WITH THE LAW OF CHILD RELOCATION

This article offers for inspection the proposition that the adversarial evidence‐based litigation process is unsuitable for resolving custody cases in general and relocation cases in particular. It analyzes the leading cases from New York, Massachusetts, California, England, Canada, and Australia. It reaches a conclusion that no jurisdiction has devised a legal standard or formula that enables a judge to predict the future best interest of a child if that child is allowed to relocate with one parent away from the other. For this reason, the court has a duty to offer as sophisticated and friendly a settlement process and atmosphere as possible. However, knowing that judges will still be required to resolve these difficult cases because they often seem impervious to settlement, the article offers thirty‐six factors that a court should consider in all move‐away cases. By relying on each of these factors that is relevant to the case, the parents will have an understanding of why the decision was made the way it was and it will also allow for effective appellate review.     

FAMILIES,COURTS, AND THE END OF LIFE: SCHIAVO AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FAMILY JUSTICE SYSTEM

The article discusses a proposed universal adoption of comprehensive family law subject matter jurisdiction, inclusive of end‐of‐life (EOL) cases, as articulated in the unified family court (UFC) concept. It posits, using the Schiavo matter to illustrate the difficulties inherent in EOL disputes, that contested EOL cases are unlike other civil court cases in that they involve intimate facts and emotionally laden family dynamics. As such, these cases pose a distinctive challenge for the courts. The article suggests that contested EOL cases should be heard in a UFC because UFCs include alternative dispute resolution (ADR) protocols to deescalate family strife with the goal of facilitating out‐of‐court settlements and that litigation is an imperfect solution for an EOL dispute. It is also noted that judges presiding in UFCs are more experienced in handling fractious family matters and thus they are more likely to avert protracted litigation if the matter is not settled via ADR.     

COMMENTARY ON "EMPIRICAL AND ETHICAL PROBLEMS WITH CUSTODY RECOMMENDATIONS:"

Whether or not custody evaluators, testifying as expert witnesses, continue to make specific custody recommendations, custody decision making will continue to be based upon inadequate and untested evidence unless and until we reform the family court system in American courtrooms. Judges and lawyers must have specialized knowledge and training about such things as the developmental needs of children, the effects of divorce on children, domestic violence, and child safety issues; lawyers must develop litigation as well as mediation and negotiation skills; specialized family courts utilizing individual calendars and case management techniques must be established; and the complexities and intellectual challenges of family law cases needs to be recognized.     

Customary Rights in Scots Law: Test Cases on Access to Land in the Nineteenth Century

Rights of access to land in Scotland for community and public use became increasingly politicised in the nineteenth century. In test cases brought by both landowners and access campaigners, they were subject to determination by the Court of Session. This article examines the doctrinal developments in the area of customary rights in nineteenth-century Scotland, and the legal and political context in which those doctrines emerged. The decisions were made against a background of reaction against the abuse of privileges by burgh governors and superiors, on the one hand, and the movement for greater public access to land on the other. It is argued that the judges of the Court of Session based their decisions, in part, on judicial values regarding the value of test case litigation and the constitutional function of the court, as well as the sanctity of private property.     

Information, Litigation, and Common Law Evolution

It is common in the legal academy to describe judicial decisiontrends leading to new common law rules as resulting from consciousjudicial effort. Evolutionary models of litigation, in contrast,treat common law as resulting from pressure applied by litigants.One apparent difficulty in the theory of litigation is explaininghow trends in judicial decisions favoring one litigant, andbiasing the legal standard, could occur. This article presentsa model in which an apparent bias in the legal standard canoccur in the absence of any effort toward this end on the partof judges. Trends can develop favoring the better-informed litigantwhose case is also meritorious. Although the model does notsuggest an unambiguous trend toward efficient legal rules, itdoes show how private information from litigants becomes embodiedin common law, an important part of the theory of efficientlegal rules.     

环境民事公益诉讼法律适用困境及其破解

环境民事公益诉讼在司法实践中已得到大量运用,但其存在以下法律适用上的问题:第一,在对具体个案是环境民事公益诉讼还是其他私益诉讼的性质判断上,现有裁判存在显著差异。第二,在环境民事公益诉讼与类似案件的审理中,不同案件裁判者在程序选择与裁判结果上也呈现各异的走向。原因在于该诉的法律适用中存在"公共利益"等现有民事法律体系难以评价的规范性构成要件。究其根源,是该诉的独立请求权基础尚未得到明确。因此裁判者在审案时通过"借用"环境侵权之诉等类似诉讼请求权基础进行涵摄时,其法律适用过程就容易产生混同。明确环境民事公益诉讼请求权并精细该诉的法律规则,有助于环境民事公益诉讼程序的公正运行与裁判结果的日趋统一。     

The Duration of Litigation

This paper analyzes the duration of litigation. The analysis of court congestion by Posner (1972) and Priest (1989) suggests that the effects of delay reduction programs may be only transitory, because initial improvements may be swamped by an offsetting increase in demand for litigation. However, we find some evidence that time to settlement was reduced in a Michigan court by a program that provided for early intervention in each case by a judge who imposed a time schedule on major events of the litigation.
Using two new data sets on personal injury claims, we find that the time to settlement increases with the amount at stake but is sharply reduced when the case is referred to a specialist in personal injury litigation. Estimates of a duration model indicate that the likelihood of settlement is increased by the completion of discovery and especially by the settlement conference. We find that the hazard of settlement increases as the case gets closer to trial. This finding is in accord with the "deadline effect" derived from certain bargaining models.     

诉讼社会视野下中国刑事司法模式的现代转型

如何以有限的司法资源应对日益增多的犯罪,这是诉讼社会视野下国人必须直面思考的重大课题。处理不当,不仅会造成严重的司法信任危机,而且也会带来更高的犯罪浪潮。因为在诉讼社会之下,案多人少的矛盾日益加剧,原有司法模式的弊端日益显著。因此,强化案件分类、实行多元模式,重视社会资本、重塑司法权威,改进司法模式、实行集中审理,应该成为诉讼社会视野下刑事司法模式现代转型的基本思路。     

Court‐Based Interventions in Spain for Families in Divorce Transition: Challenges in the Implementation of (Co)‐Parenting Coordination

Families facing separation or divorce in Spain encounter a number of obstacles, including a primarily adversarial and slow justice system, nonspecialized courts and judges, and a lack of resources to help them through the process. Recent legislation at the regional level (autonomous communities) is moving toward emphasizing shared parental responsibility and introducing parenting plans, while at the national level, legislation advances slowly. One of the main challenges professionals are facing in high‐conflict couple separation is protecting children from the effects of being in the middle of their parents’ conflict. Traditional psychological, legal, and social services are insufficient to support parents and protect their children from interparental hostile conflict—which can be exacerbated by litigation, professional intervention, domestic violence, or addiction. This article illustrates, through a case study, the implementation of parenting coordination in Spain. Different jurisdictions in Spain are slowly implementing (co‐)parenting coordination, an in‐depth intervention designed to support these families. The objective is to help families focus on children's needs and follow the court‐approved parenting plans or court orders, reduce relitigation, and improve parental communication and conflict resolution skills. This article analyzes different aspects and challenges relating to the implementation of parenting coordination in Spain. Recommendations are then made to address them.