Judicial Hellholes are places
that have a disproportionately harmful impact on civil litigation.
Litigation tourists, guided by their personal injury lawyers
seek out these places because they know they will produce a positive
outcomean excessive verdict or settlement, a favorable
precedent, or both. Watchlist: California.
In this case, we conclude that simultaneous
means occurring at the same time. We recognize the
folks at Merriam Webster reached that same conclusion some time
ago, but in light of what occurred in this case, it apparently
We are called upon to answer a question,
universal to the legal profession, Can they do that?
People who live outside the forest
need not in future appear before the royal justices of the forest
in answer to general summonses, unless they are actually involved
in proceedings or are sureties for someone who has been seized
for a forest offence.
The history of American freedom is,
in no small measure, the history of procedure.
The history of procedure is a series
of attempts to solve the problems created by the ..preceding.generation's
[I]t is procedure that marks much
of the difference between rule by law and rule by fiat.
In the Frontier West the technique
was said to be: 'hang him first; give him a trial later.' Here
we have a modern variation of that theme: 'demand payment of
money damages first; tell him the amount later.'
With jurisdictional deadlines, the
rule, like the song, is what a difference a day makes.
If this case is an example, the term
'civil procedure' is an oxymoron.
I'll let you write the substance...you
let me write the procedure, and I'll screw you every time.
Like a battlefield surgeon sorting
the hopeful from the hopeless, a motion to dismiss invokes a
form of legal triage, a paring of viable claims from those doomed
A tribunal of this state may exercise
personal jurisdiction over a nonresident individual ... [who]
engaged in sexual intercourse in this state and the child may
have been conceived by that act of intercourse. (New application of "minimum contacts.")a
A judges robe is not a kings
crown. * * * It was never intended to protect acts of thuggery
against litigants merely because the assailant happens to be
Federal Civil Procedure Consolidation
of cases is not like a marriage, producing one indissoluble union
from two distinct cases; instead, consolidation is an artificial
link forged by a court for the administrative convenience of
the parties, which fails to erase the fact that, underneath consolidation's
facade, lie two individual cases.
An appellate court will decline to interpret the rules of civil procedure to create an additional trap for the unwary as a technical defense or require that mosquitoes be killed with cannons.
...........................From Casebook's Chapter Opening Vignettes
[U]ndoubtedly, a state may regulate
at pleasure the modes of proceeding in its courts....
[A] California court may exercise
jurisdiction over nonresidents on any basis not inconsistent
with the United States or California Constitutions. This section
manifests an intent to exercise the broadest possible jurisdiction,
limited only by constitutional considerations.
While orderly procedure demands a
reasonable enforcement of the rules of pleading, the basic principle
of the code system in this state is that the administration of
justice shall not be embarrassed by technicalities, strict rules
of construction, or useless forms.
These rules are applied liberally
in favor of discovery, and (contrary to popular belief), fishing
expeditions are permissible in some cases.
[A] summary judgment is a drastic
measure which deprives the losing party of trial on the merits.
Summary judgment procedure is properly
regarded not as a disfavored procedural shortcut, but rather
as an integral part of the Federal Rules as a whole, which are
designed to secure the just, speedy and inexpensive determination
of every action.'
[T]he most transcendent privilege
which any subject can enjoy, or wish for....
The man who wants a jury has a bad
Judgments come in ordinary typescript
on ordinary paper; they are not even suitable for framing. A
judgment is an important step toward what the plaintiff wants,
but it is not what he wants. The judgment must be enforced.
Californias law of appellate
jurisdiction is full of fiendishly fine distinctions worthy of
the most legalistic of medieval clergy.
[T]he labor of judges would be increased
almost to the breaking point if every past decision could be
reopened in every case, and one could not lay one's own course
of bricks on the secure foundation of the courses laid by others
who had gone before....