A Process Theory of Torts

This article is meant to reconcile two schools of intellectual thought regarding tort law, the conceptualist and the anti-conceptualist. It argues that torts must be understood as a system in perpetual process--forever indefinite and infinitely malleable in its precise theoretical, doctrinal and practical manifestations--yet ultimately bounded in its possibilities. It then defines the limits of torts law as a process that constantly regenerates the old face of tort theory, doctrine and practice into the new

Cy Pres and the Optimal Class Action

This Article, prepared for a symposium on class actions, examines the problem of cy pres relief through the lens of ensuring that class actions have an optimal claim structure and class membership. It finds that the present cy pres doctrine does little to advance the creation of optimal class actions, and may do some harm to achieving that goal. The Article then proposes an alternative “nudge” to induce putative class counsel to structure class actions in an optimal way: set attorneys’ fees so that counsel is compensated through a combination of an hourly market rate and a percentage of the net recovery to the class itself. The Article demonstrates that this approach to attorneys’ fees aligns the interests of the class in maximizing its recovery, class counsel in obtaining the most profitable (but reasonable) fee, and society in certifying the class action with the greatest expected net benefit. This approach also eliminates many of the agency-cost problems associated with class counsel failing to attend to the interests of the class. Finally, this approach eliminates most of the incentive for class counsel to seek cy pres relief, although in some cases cy pres relief may still be appropriate

Professor Jay Tidmarsh Commencement Address

Professor Jay Tidmarsh, who had been selected as Law School Distinguished Teacher, addressed the graduates; his remarks follow

Exiting Litigation

The American judicial system will face significant challenges in the twenty-first century. One of its immediate challenges is adapting the rules of civil procedure to the stresses under which the civil-justice system operates. Some of the most notable pressures arise from transnational litigation, mass litigation, proliferation of claims against governmental and corporate institutions, and competition from methods of alternative dispute resolution that promise to dispense cheaper, faster, and more satisfying justice

Superiority as Unity

One of Professor Redish’s many important contributions to legal scholarship is his recent work on class actions. Grounding his argument in the theory of democratic accountability that has been at the centerpiece of all his work, Professor Redish suggests that, in nearly all instances, class actions violate the individual autonomy of litigants and should not be used by courts. This Essay, prepared for a festschrift in honor of Professor Redish, begins from the opposite premise: that class actions should be grounded in the notion of social utility rather than autonomy so that class actions should be used whenever they achieve net social gains. This idea of “superiority” presents some difficulties, not the least of which is the capacity of a court to determine whether a class action is indeed superior to other forms of dispute resolution. The Essay proposes a series of presumptions that give effect to superiority and make an inquiry into superiority easier for courts to conduct. When the class-certification outcomes obtained by these presumptions are examined, they do not result in the near-absolute position against class actions that Professor Redish favors, but surprising convergences in the autonomy and utility approaches emerge

Cradled in the Declaration of Independence

This book review engages recent scholarship on the nature of civil-rights lawyering in the African-American bar in the generation before Brown v. Board of Education. Using the recent biography of Earl Burrus Dickerson, one of the leaders of the African-American bar before World War II, the book review finds support for the emerging view that, in the years before Brown, the African-American civil-rights bar was not focused on ending de jure segregation in public institutions, but rather in building up African-American institutions. Contrary to recent scholarship, however, the review suggests that Dickerson personally preferred a more integrationist strategy, and his efforts to build up African-American institutions was less a conscious strategy than a realization of the limitations on his ability to practice law as he wished. Freedom of action, rather than racial equality, was Dickerson\u27s great motivator

The Litigation Budget

Because of fears that litigation is too costly, reduction of litigation expenses has been the touchstone of procedural reform for the past thirty years. In certain circumstances, however, the parties have incentives—both rational and irrational—to spend more on a lawsuit than the social benefits that the case provides. Present and proposed reform efforts do not adequately address these incentives, and, in some instances, exacerbate the parties’ incentives to overspend. The best way to ensure that the cost of a lawsuit does not exceed the benefits that it provides to the parties and society is to control spending directly: to require the parties to file and live within litigation budgets. These “costs budgets,” which are already in use in the United Kingdom, help to ensure that the costs of litigation remain less than the benefits. After describing the workings of a costs-budget system, the Article considers practical, political, and constitutional critiques. None of these concerns is disabling. American rulemakers who are serious about containing the litigation costs should grant courts the power to use costs budgets