<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/atom10full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0">
    <title>Civil Procedure Prof Blog</title>
    
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/" />
    <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:weblog-637098</id>
    <updated>2009-07-13T09:09:36-04:00</updated>
    <subtitle>A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network</subtitle>
    <generator uri="http://www.typepad.com/">TypePad</generator>
    <link rel="self" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/CivilProcedureProfBlog" type="application/atom+xml" /><feedburner:emailServiceId xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0">CivilProcedureProfBlog</feedburner:emailServiceId><feedburner:feedburnerHostname xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0">http://feedburner.google.com</feedburner:feedburnerHostname><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com" /><entry>
        <title>I am in A.P. Contracts .... </title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/07/i-am-in-ap-contracts-.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/07/i-am-in-ap-contracts-.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d8341bfae553ef011571fcd866970b</id>
        <published>2009-07-13T09:09:36-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-07-13T09:09:36-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Property Prof. Ben Barros thinks "moving to an advanced placement system for law school would be a win for everyone." Read his post here.</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Rule 60(b) and bad lawyering</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/07/rule-60b6-and-bad-lawyering.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/07/rule-60b6-and-bad-lawyering.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d8341bfae553ef01157104681a970c</id>
        <published>2009-07-12T12:57:12-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-07-12T12:57:35-04:00</updated>
        <summary>When must a district court grant a Rule 60(b) motion to vacate a default judgment due to bad lawyering? Essentially never, says the Seventh Circuit. Because of the principal-agent nature of the lawyer-client relationship, which attributes the lawyer's conduct to...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>The Past, Present, and Future of Trans-Substantivity in Federal Civil Procedure </title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/07/the-past-present-and-future-of-transsubstantivity-in-federal-civil-procedure-.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/07/the-past-present-and-future-of-transsubstantivity-in-federal-civil-procedure-.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d8341bfae553ef011571c8aa99970b</id>
        <published>2009-07-06T10:02:42-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-07-06T10:02:42-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Prof. David Marcus recently posted an interesting piece on SSRN, The Past, Present, and Future of Trans-Substantivity in Federal Civil Procedure. Click the title to download it. The abstract follows: The trans-substantivity principle – the same procedural rules should apply...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Two Interesting Links:</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/06/two-interesting-links.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/06/two-interesting-links.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-68204599</id>
        <published>2009-06-17T11:28:24-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-06-17T11:31:46-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Two thought-provoking links for the day: Over at his blog, Adamsdrafting, Ken Adams has an interesting post about the admissibility of expert testimony in the context of ambiguous contract terms. Whether a contract is ambiguous is a legal question. Does...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Junior Federal Courts Conference at Michigan State</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/06/junior-federal-courts-conference-at-michigan-state.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/06/junior-federal-courts-conference-at-michigan-state.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-68137011</id>
        <published>2009-06-15T16:34:22-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-06-15T16:34:22-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Click the link to view an updated flyer for the Federal Courts Conference at Michigan State this fall. Prof. Lou Mulligan is the contact person, and you can find his information in the flyer. Download Federal Courts Conference Flyer1</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Cert. Granted</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/06/cert-granted.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/06/cert-granted.html" thr:count="1" thr:when="2009-06-17T17:01:11-04:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-67904985</id>
        <published>2009-06-09T14:27:41-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-06-09T14:27:41-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Yesterday, the Supreme Court granted certiorari on the following issue: For purposes of determining principal place of business for diversity jurisdiction citizenship under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, can court disregard location of nationwide corporation's headquarters--i.e., its nerve center? The case...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Civil Procedure</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Case of Interest -- Reed Elsevier v. Muchnick</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/06/case-of-interest-reed-elsevier-v-muchnick.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/06/case-of-interest-reed-elsevier-v-muchnick.html" thr:count="1" thr:when="2009-06-09T07:35:13-04:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-67809977</id>
        <published>2009-06-08T00:37:32-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-06-08T00:37:32-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Readers may be interested in a case currently pending before the Supreme Court called Reed Elsevier v. Muchnick. It’s a copyright case, but it raises neat civil procedure issues. The case is a class action on behalf of authors who...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Against Twombly &amp; Iqbal -- A Reply to Drug &amp; Device Law Post</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/06/response-to-drug-device-law-post.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/06/response-to-drug-device-law-post.html" thr:count="1" thr:when="2009-06-08T15:58:06-04:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-67687069</id>
        <published>2009-06-05T15:50:24-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-06-05T20:51:22-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Rory and Jeremy have invited responses to the formidable and polite defense of Twombly and Iqbal posted by the folks at the Drug &amp; Device Law blog. I’m not shy—I’ll give it a shot. Let me first note a couple...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Reviewing Remand Orders </title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/06/justice-scalia-once-asked-a-brilliant-question-how-can-that-be-how-can-a-statute-explicitly-eliminating-appellate--jurisdic.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/06/justice-scalia-once-asked-a-brilliant-question-how-can-that-be-how-can-a-statute-explicitly-eliminating-appellate--jurisdic.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-67546899</id>
        <published>2009-06-02T11:18:54-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-06-02T11:19:56-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Justice Scalia once asked a brilliant question: "How can that be? How can a statute explicitly eliminating appellate jurisdiction to review a remand order not 'control' whether an appellate court has jurisdiction to review a remand order?" His question reflects...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Civil Procedure</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>The other side of the Twombly/Iqbal coin:</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/05/the-other-side-of-the-twomblyiqbal-coin.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/05/the-other-side-of-the-twomblyiqbal-coin.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-67393299</id>
        <published>2009-05-28T23:41:37-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-28T23:41:37-04:00</updated>
        <summary>A few days ago, the folks at Drug and Device Law noted the Iqbal decision and the unanimous condemnation of the decision among academic bloggers. Beck and Herrmann promised to present the other side of the argument, and today they...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Civil Procedure</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Beyond Twombly (by Prof. Scott Dodson)</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/05/beyond-twombly-by-prof-scott-dodson.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/05/beyond-twombly-by-prof-scott-dodson.html" thr:count="4" thr:when="2009-05-27T04:50:06-04:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-66941615</id>
        <published>2009-05-18T17:20:14-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-18T17:23:38-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Today, the Supreme Court decided Ashcroft v. Iqbal, a case that continues the recent evolution of pleading standards under Rule 8 mostly begun by a case from two years ago, Bell Atlantic v. Twombly. As I have written previously here,...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Civil Procedure</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Iqbal decided </title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/05/iqbal-decided-.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/05/iqbal-decided-.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-66921665</id>
        <published>2009-05-18T10:41:15-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-18T10:41:15-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Today the Supreme Court released its decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal. Section IV of the opinion has much to say about Twombly and notice plausibility pleading. --RR</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Civil Procedure</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>2 USSCT Decisions</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/05/2-ussct-decisions.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/05/2-ussct-decisions.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-66350299</id>
        <published>2009-05-04T11:42:18-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-04T11:42:18-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Today, the Supreme Court decided Carlsbad Technology, Inc. v. HIF Bio, Inc., a case whose Certworthiness was apparent even back in November of 2007. Our readers will also be interested in today's Arthur Andersen, LLP v. Carlisle decision, which involves...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Civil Procedure</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Staying Execution of a Mandate</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/04/staying-execution-of-a-mandate.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/04/staying-execution-of-a-mandate.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-65662039</id>
        <published>2009-04-17T14:40:18-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-04-17T14:40:18-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Our own 10th Court of Appeals in Waco decided an interesting procedural case yesterday. Chief Justice Gray's introduction cleanly states the issue: In a prior proceeding, we were asked to decide certain issues. We did. We issued an opinion. In...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Junior Faculty Federal Courts Workshop </title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/04/junior-faculty-federal-courts-workshop-.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/04/junior-faculty-federal-courts-workshop-.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-65515555</id>
        <published>2009-04-15T16:43:45-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-04-15T16:43:46-04:00</updated>
        <summary>THE SECOND ANNUAL JUNIOR FACULTY FEDERAL COURTS WORKSHOP October 22-23, 2009 The Michigan State University College of Law is pleased to announce that the Second Annual Junior Faculty Federal Courts Workshop will take place on its campus October 22–23, 2009....</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>FRCP Amendments</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/04/frcp-amendments.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/04/frcp-amendments.html" thr:count="1" thr:when="2009-04-13T21:16:24-04:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-65134821</id>
        <published>2009-04-06T11:41:08-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-04-06T11:41:08-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Prof. Ben Spencer reports here on recent Federal Rules amendments approved by the Supreme Court. You can also click here for more information on the U.S. Courts page. --RR</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Pleading and the Dilemmas of "General Rules"</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/03/pleading-and-the-dilemmas-of-general-rules.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/03/pleading-and-the-dilemmas-of-general-rules.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-64610637</id>
        <published>2009-03-25T09:01:42-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-03-25T09:01:42-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Click the article title to download Pleading and the Dilemmas of General Rules, by Prof. Stephen B. Burbank. The article will appear in the Wisconsin Law Review. The abstract follows: This article comments on Professor Geoffrey Miller's article about pleading...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Alternative MDL-management Method</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/03/alternative-mdlmanagement-method.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/03/alternative-mdlmanagement-method.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-64362187</id>
        <published>2009-03-19T11:27:29-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-03-19T11:27:53-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Click the article's title to download The Quasi-Class Action Method of Managing Multi-District Litigations: Problems and a Proposal, authored by Profs. Charles Silver and Geoffrey Miller. The abstract follows: This article uses three recent multi-district litigations (MDLs) that produced massive...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Erie Meets the First Amendment </title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/03/erie-meets-the-firs-amendment-.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/03/erie-meets-the-firs-amendment-.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-64280455</id>
        <published>2009-03-17T16:52:55-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-03-17T16:53:22-04:00</updated>
        <summary>Howard Wasserman just posted an interesting question over at PrawfsBlawg: So here is a nice Erie question: In a diversity action, must a federal court apply the state-law standard for when a plaintiff can subpoena the identity of an anonymous...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Supreme Court decides Vaden</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/03/supreme-court-d.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/civpro/2009/03/supreme-court-d.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-63836955</id>
        <published>2009-03-09T11:20:06-04:00</published>
        <updated>2009-03-09T11:20:06-04:00</updated>
        <summary>SCOTUS Blog reports that the Supreme Court "ruled that a firm seeking to compel arbitration of a dispute may take the case to a federal District Court only if the underlying controversy could have been litigated in federal court. A...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>CivPro Blogger</name>
        </author>
        
        


    </entry>
 
</feed><!-- ph=1 --><!-- nhm:from_kauri -->
