Geoffrey Miller is one of the few law professors out there who consistently investigates real empirical questions about class actions. He’s published on the role of objectors in class-action settlements, the use of non-pecuniary relief, and even the effect of judicial review on settlement rates. So when Miller comes out with a policy proposal–as he
motion to dismiss
The Value of Early Challenges: Richard Nagareda’s 1938 All Over Again
By The Editors on
Posted in Motions Practice
Vanderbilt law professor Richard Nagareda has written an essay for the DePaul Law Review entitled "1938 All Over Again?: Pre-trial as Trial in Complex Litigation." For the most part, this essay is a 30,000-foot view of litigation that emphasizes “cost imposition” (academic-speak for the idea that each party might try to drive up the other…
The Cost of Complex Litigation: Preliminary Rhetoric for the Motion to Dismiss
By The Editors on
Posted in Motions Practice
Since the Supreme court set out its “plausible claim” pleading standard in Ashcroft v. Iqbal last year, there has been a flurry of commentary – in law reviews and online – about the wisdom and the policy implications of the decision and its immediate predecessor, Bell Atlantic v. Twombly. The latest entry into that…
The Pre-Certification Motion to Dismiss – Framing the Coming Debate
By The Editors on
Posted in Motions Practice
Often, when a defendant receives a class-action complaint, its first reaction is to see whether or not there are grounds to dismiss the action. (For defendants in federal court, that impulse is particularly acute since the Supreme Court handed down its opinion in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, which demonstrates little tolerance for purposely vague pleadings.) …