Trial Practice and Procedure

This Article surveys the 1991 decisions of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals that made a significant impact upon the area of trial practice and procedure. One of the most important developments in this area of law occurred in the case Wright v. Preferred Research, Inc. In Wright the Eleventh Circuit examined closely Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58 and, in a case of first impression, held that when a district court amends a judgment, Rule 58 did not require that a separate document, setting out the terms of the remitted judgment, be entered before the time for the appeal begins to run. Another case of particular interest to practicing attorneys is Pelletier v. Zweifel. In Pelletier the court of appeals reversed a district court\u27s ruling and imposed double costs and attorney fees against a party for filing a frivolous complaint and a subsequent frivolous appeal. In addition, in Johns v. Jarrard, the Eleventh Circuit addressed the responsibility of federal trial judges in relation to answering questions of a jury and the consequences when a judge\u27s statements mislead the jury

Labor Law

This Article surveys the 1992 decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit that impacted the area of traditional labor law. More specifically, the cases addressed in this Article include noteworthy decisions under the National Labor Relations Act ( NLRA ), the Labor Management Relations Act ( LMRA ), the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 ( FLSA ), the Occupational Safety and Hazard Act ( OSHA ), and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ( ERISA ). This Article does not discuss every case decided by the Eleventh Circuit addressing these federal labor laws during the survey year of 1992; also, this Article does not discuss every issue raised by the parties in the cases covered. Instead, this Article intends only to cover the major developments in the area of labor law this past year. As in years past, the Eleventh Circuit considered several cases covering a wide.variety of issues in the labor law sector. While some cases covered new ground, the majority of the cases simply revisited the old rules and attempted to clarify their use through the facts in the case presently before the court