Show simple item record Carrington, Paul en_US 2011-06-21T17:27:40Z 2011-06-21T17:27:40Z 2010 en_US
dc.identifier.citation Carrington,Paul D.. 2010. Politics and Civil Procedure Rulemaking: Reflections on Experience. Duke law journal 60(3): 597-667. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0012-7086 en_US
dc.description.abstract This Article is a reflection on personal experience as well as an account of what has happened to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in the most recent quarter century It observes that the Supreme Court of the United States has assigned to itself a role in making procedural law inconsistent with the Rules Enabling Act of 1934 or any more-recent utterance of Congress This procedural law made by the Court is responsive to the desire of business interests to weaken the ability of citizens to enforce laws enacted to protect them from business misconduct The Article concludes with the suggestion that Congress should now act to constrain the role of the Court and restore the ability of citizens to enforce their rights in civil proceedings in federal courts en_US
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.publisher DUKE UNIV en_US
dc.relation.isversionof en_US
dc.subject justice reform act en_US
dc.subject alternative dispute resolution en_US
dc.subject hague evidence en_US
dc.subject convention en_US
dc.subject rules enabling act en_US
dc.subject federal-rules en_US
dc.subject litigation matrix en_US
dc.subject discovery rules en_US
dc.subject always enough en_US
dc.subject supreme-court en_US
dc.subject local rules en_US
dc.subject law en_US
dc.title Politics and Civil Procedure Rulemaking: Reflections on Experience en_US
dc.title.alternative en_US
dc.description.version Version of Record en_US 2010-12-0 en_US
duke.description.endpage 667 en_US
duke.description.issue 3 en_US
duke.description.startpage 597 en_US
duke.description.volume 60 en_US
dc.relation.journal Duke law journal en_US

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record