In a prior post, I suggested that in the absence of a thorough re-vamping of the rules of civil procedure, parties and practitioners should try to invent new ways to resolve disputes outside the court system, How exactly would that work? Let’s start by considering how to open a case, both within and outside the court system. If you’re having a problem with your neighbor/boss/business partner/stranger, etc., you can’t simply ask the court to help you resolve that conflict. Instead you must file a complaint setting forth a cognizable legal claim. You must include all the elements of the claim. You must have damages or an entitlement to equitable relief. You must identify yourself as the victim and the other […]
The ink is barely dry on the breakthrough agreement reached this week with Iran, requiring that country to eliminate most of its nuclear weapons capacity in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions, and many critics are already out in full force decrying the agreement. It seems remarkable that they could be so sure of their opposition without having had much time to read or study the text, or consider carefully whether this deal is better than the alternative of continued conflict. (In previous posts–here and here–on this topic, I outlined the way in which I think any negotiated agreement should be evaluated, not by comparing it to the outcome each side would have preferred, but instead by comparing it […]
Here is Secretary of State John Kerry reporting on the progress of negotiations with Iran. His statement should sound familiar to a lot of mediators: on continuing negotiations so long as progress is being made, on the importance of building an agreement that will last, on the need to avoid being rushed or constrained by arbitrary deadlines, and at the same time on recognizing that difficult decisions need to be made soon if agreement is to be reached.
The reformers who drafted the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in the 1930’s thought that if we could only get rid of the complexities of ancient pleading practices, and liberalize discovery, cases could be fairly adjudicated on their merits instead of being won or lost on technicalities. Their intent can be gleaned from Rule 1, which provides that the rules “should be construed and administered to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.” To a large extent, the simplified rules we have been living with for so many years must be judged a success, simply because they have stood the test of time. On the other hand, hardly anyone would say that Rule 1 accurately […]