NATIONAL CIVIL JUSTICE INSTITUTE
Programs
Judges Forum on Civil Justice
2022 JUDGES FORUM: CIVIL JUSTICE IN AMERICA: RESPONSIBILITY TO THE PUBLIC. HELD IN PERSON JULY 16, 2022 IN SEATTLE, WA. 81 JUDGES, ACADEMICS, AND ATTORNEYS FROM 27 STATES PARTICIPATED IN THE FIRST IN-PERSON FORUM SINCE THE START OF THE PANDEMIC. ORIGINAL LEGAL ACADEMIC PAPERS AUTHORED FOR AND PRESENTED AT THE FORUM INCLUDED "THE RULE OF LAW IS FRAGILE: THE IMPORTANCE OF LEGITIMACY AND ACCESS" BY PROF. STEPHEN DANIELS OF THE AMERICAN BAR FOUNDATION, AND "CIVIL JUSTICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY: THE CHALLENGE OF GRAVE CORPORATE MISCONDUCT" BY PROF. STEVEN LANDSMAN OF DEPAUL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW. ATTENDING JUDGES GAVE THE FORUM A RATING OF 4.775 OUT OF 5.GeographiesNot indicatedDatesAug 1, 2021 – Jul 31, 2022Source990No causes providedNo populations provided––Academic Symposium on Internet and Law
2021 ACADEMIC SYMPOSIUM "THE INTERNET AND THE LAW: LEGAL CHALLENGES IN THE NEW DIGITAL AGE" WITH THE CENTER FOR LITIGATION AND COURTS AT UC LAW SF (FORMERLY HASTINGS LAW) ON NOV. 6-7, 2021 IN SAN FRANCISCO. ELEVEN ORIGINAL ACADEMIC PAPERS WERE PREPARED FOR THE SYMPOSIUM, WHICH ADDRESSED THE PROMISES AND CHALLENGES CONFRONTING US IN THE NEW DIGITAL AGE, AND EXAMINED HOW THE AMERICAN JUSTICE SYSTEM CAN PROVIDE BOTH BUSINESS AND CONSUMER SECTIONS WITH TAILORED PROTECTIONS TO WHICH WE HAVE BECOME ACCUSTOMED, AND HELPED DEFINE THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF EACH SECTOR. PANELS ADDRESSED LITIGATION MEETS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; PSEUDONYMOUS LITIGATION IN THE AGE OF GOOGLING; INTERNET COMMERCE & PRODUCTS LIABILITY; OBTAINING EVIDENCE IN THE DIGITAL AGE; INTERNET DATA ACCUMULATION AND PROTECTION; AND SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT. THE FINAL PAPERS WERE PUBLISHED IN VOLUME 73, ISSUE 5 OF THE UC HASTINGS LAW JOURNAL IN AUGUST 2022.GeographiesNot indicatedDatesAug 1, 2021 – Jul 31, 2022Source990No causes providedNo populations provided––Civil Justice Scholarship Award
THE INSTITUTE'S 2022 APPELLATE ADVOCACY AWARD WAS PRESENTED TO DEEPAK GUPTA, DENNIS CONNER, AND KYLE FARRAR FOR THEIR WORK ON THE STATE AND FEDERAL LEVEL FOR A CRUCIAL SUPREME COURT VICTORY. FOR THREE DECADES, THE U.S. SUPREME COURT HAS ISSUED A SERIES OF DECISIONS ON PERSONAL JURISDICTION THAT HAVE MADE IT INCREASINGLY HARDER FOR PLAINTIFFS TO HOLD WRONGDOERS ACCOUNTABLE IN COURT. FORD MOTOR CO. V. MONTANA EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, 141 S.CT. 1017 (U.S. 2021) REPRESENTS A STUNNING BREAK IN THE COURT'S LONG-RUNNING TREND. THE DECISION AROSE FROM TWO PRODUCTS LIABILITY ACTIONS INVOLVING FORD AUTOMOBILES. THE DRIVER OF ONE CAR DIED IN AN INCIDENT IN MONTANA, AND A PASSENGER IN THE OTHER CAR WAS SEVERELY INJURED IN A COLLISION IN MINNESOTA. THE INJURIES OCCURRED IN THE FORUM STATES, THE VICTIMS WERE RESIDENTS OF THE FORUM STATES, AND FORD DID SUBSTANTIAL BUSINESS IN BOTH STATES, YET IN BOTH CASES FORD MOVED TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION, ARGUING THAT THE COMPANY HAD DONE NOTHING IN THE FORUM STATES TO CAUSE THE PLAINTIFFS' CLAIMS. DENNIS CONNER REPRESENTED THE PLAINTIFFS WHO PREVAILED IN THE MONTANA LOWER COURTS AND SUPREME COURT; KYLE FARRAR SUCCESSFULLY REPRESENTED PLAINTIFFS IN THE MINNESOTA TRIAL COURT, COURT OF APPEALS, AND SUPREME COURT. FORD APPEALED BOTH STATE COURT DECISIONS TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, WHERE THE CASES WERE CONSOLIDATED. DEEPAK GUPTA BRIEFED AND ARGUED THE CONSOLIDATED CASE IN THE SUPREME COURT, FOCUSING ON COMMON SENSE AND THE LACK OF ANY UNFAIRNESS TO FORD. BECAUSE OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC, ORAL ARGUMENT WAS HELD BY TELEPHONE, WITHOUT COUNSEL BEING ABLE TO SEE THE JUSTICES. GUPTA ALSO ORGANIZED A POWERFUL AMICUS CURIAE CAMPAIGN, RECRUITING THE MAIN STREET ALLIANCE (A NATIONAL NETWORK OF SMALL BUSINESS COALITIONS), THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HOME BUILDERS, AND THE ATTORNEYS GENERAL OF 40 STATES AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (INCLUDING SOME NOT USUALLY ALLIED WITH CONSUMER INTERESTS). THE RESULT WAS A UNANIMOUS (8-0) DECISION AUTHORED BY JUSTICE ELENA KAGAN THAT CONCLUDED THAT, "WHEN A COMPANY LIKE FORD SERVES A MARKET FOR A PRODUCT IN A STATE AND THAT PRODUCT CAUSES INJURY IN THE STATE TO ONE OF ITS RESIDENTS, THE STATE'S COURTS MAY ENTERTAIN THE RESULTING SUIT." 141 S.CT. AT 1022. THE INSTITUTE RECOGNIZES WITH HIGH DISTINCTION VICTORY IN A PRECEDENT- SETTING EMPLOYEE-RIGHTS CLASS ACTION BY KIMBERLY KRALOWEC. APPLE, INC., ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES IN THE WORLD, LONG DECLINED TO PAY ITS RETAIL STORE EMPLOYEES FOR THE TIME THEY SPENT WAITING FOR, AND UNDERGOING, MANDATORY SECURITY CHECKS OF THEIR PERSONAL POSSESSIONS WHEN THEY LEFT WORK. THE COMPANY CONTENDED THAT THE EMPLOYEES WERE NOT PERFORMING WORK DURING THAT TIME, AND COULD HAVE AVOIDED THE SECURITY CHECKS BY LEAVING THEIR PERSONAL POSSESSIONS AT HOME. MS. KRALOWEC REPRESENTED APPLE EMPLOYEES IN A WAGE-AND-HOUR CLASS ACTION IN FEDERAL COURT, CHALLENGING THE COMPANY'S POLICY. THE DISTRICT COURT GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO APPLE. ON APPEAL, THE NINTH CIRCUIT CERTIFIED QUESTIONS TO THE STATE SUPREME COURT. IN FRLEKIN V APPLE INC., 457 P.3D 526 (CAL. 2020), MS. KRALOWEC SECURED A PRECEDENT-SETTING RULING ON THE SCOPE OF CALIFORNIA'S DEFINITION OF COMPENSABLE "HOURS WORKED." THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT HELD THAT (1) THE TIME EMPLOYEES SPENT ON THE EMPLOYER'S PREMISES WAITING FOR, AND UNDERGOING, MANDATORY EXIT SEARCHES WAS EMPLOYER-CONTROLLED ACTIVITY, AND THEREFORE IT WAS COMPENSABLE AS "HOURS WORKED" WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE "CONTROL" CLAUSE OF THE STATE WAGE ORDER; AND (2) THE DECISION COULD NOT BE LIMITED TO PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION. ON REMAND, THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT REVERSED ITS EARLIER DECISION FOR APPLE AND ENTERED SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON LIABILITY FOR THE EMPLOYEES. THE INSTITUTE HELD ITS CIVIL JUSTICE SCHOLARSHIP AWARD -- DESIGNED TO RECOGNIZE OUTSTANDING LEGAL SCHOLARSHIP ON CIVIL JUSTICE ISSUES, AND TO ENCOURAGE SUCH SCHOLARSHIP IN THE FUTURE. THE 2022 AWARD RECIPIENTS WERE PROF. BRIAN FITZPATRICK OF VANDERBILT LAW SCHOOL AND PROF. RICHARD FRANKEL OF DREXEL UNIVERSITY'S THOMAS R. KLINE SCHOOL OF LAW. PROFESSOR FITZPATRICK WAS RECOGNIZED FOR HIS BOOK, THE CONSERVATIVE CASE FOR CLASS ACTIONS (U. CHICAGO PRESS, 2020). IN THE BOOK, HE DEFENDS CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS AGAINST THEIR MOST POWERFUL CRITICS: POLITICAL CONSERVATIVES, CORPORATIONS, AND RELATED INSTITUTIONS. FITZPATRICK CONVINCINGLY ARGUES THAT CLASS ACTIONS ARE THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY OF ENFORCING LAWS THAT ENSURE A WELL-FUNCTIONING MARKET, INCLUDING LAWS AGAINST CORPORATE MISCONDUCT. HE ALSO ANALYZES MANY POTENTIAL PROBLEMS WITH CLASS ACTIONS AND POTENTIAL WAYS TO IMPROVE THEM. PROFESSOR FRANKEL WAS RECOGNIZED FOR HIS ARTICLE, CORPORATE HOSTILITY TO ARBITRATION (50 SETON HALL L. REV. 707 (2020)), IN WHICH HE EXPOSES INCONSISTENCIES IN THE BEHAVIOR OF CORPORATIONS WITH RESPECT TO MANDATORY ARBITRATION. HE SHOWS THAT THEY CAN, AND DO, USE THEIR DRAFTING POWER TO EXCLUDE PARTICULAR CLAIMS FROM ARBITRATION IN ORDER TO SERVE THEIR SELF- INTEREST, WHILE THE FEDERAL ARBITRATION ACT PROHIBITS STATES FROM REGULATING ARBITRATION FOR THOSE SAME REASONS. THE INSTITUTE ALSO RECOGNIZED LAW REVIEW ARTICLES FOR HIGH DISTINCTION AMONG THE 49 NOMINATIONS RECEIVED. PROFESSOR BROOKE COLEMAN OF SEATTLE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW IS RECOGNIZED FOR HER ARTICLE SOWHITEMALE: FEDERAL CIVIL RULEMAKING (113 NW. U. L. REV. 407 (2018)) IN WHICH SHE ADDRESSES GENDER AND RACIAL INEQUALITY IN THE RULEMAKING PROCESS, ASKING MEMBERS OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION TO RECOGNIZE, ACCOUNT FOR, AND ADDRESS INSTITUTIONAL SEXISM AND RACISM. PROFESSOR DAVID NOLL OF RUTGERS LAW SCHOOL IS RECOGNIZED FOR HIS ARTICLE ARBITRATION CONFLICTS (103 MINN. L. REV. 665 (2018)), IN WHICH HE EXPLORES THE QUESTION OF HOW THE FEDERAL ARBITRATION ACT (FAA) RELATES TO OTHER FEDERAL LAWS, WHICH PROVIDE SOME OF THE MOST IMPORTANT CHECKS ON THE USE OF ARBITRATION TO BLOCK AGGREGATE LITIGATION AND HIDE EVIDENCE OF WRONGDOING FROM PUBLIC SCRUTINY.GeographiesNot indicatedDatesAug 1, 2021 – Jul 31, 2022Source990No causes providedNo populations provided––
Copyright 2026. All rights reserved to Chario Inc. (d.b.a. Impala)