masthead


  NELLCO Repository Home

Customized Email Alerts by Subject Area

Search

My Account

NELLCO Home



poweredbybepress

 

logo

Available Papers  •  University of Pennsylvania Law School Web Site  •  Search the Collection  •  Policies
NELLCO LSR > UPENN > WPS bealert

The Complexity of Modern American Civil Litigation: Curse or Cure?
Stephen B. Burbank, University of Pennsylvania Law School

Download the Paper (PDF format) - June 11, 2007 Tell a colleague about it.
Printing Tips: Select 'print as image' in the Acrobat print dialog if you have trouble printing.

ABSTRACT:
Originally prepared for the 2007 meetings of the Italian Association of Comparative Law, this paper seeks to excavate the roots of procedural complexity in modern American litigation. Proceeding from the view that there is no accepted definition of complex litigation in the United States, the paper discusses five related phenomena that the author regards as consequential: (1) the architecture of modern American lawsuits and the procedural philosophy that architecture reflects, (2) the volume of litigation and the public and private policies, attitudes and arrangements that affect it, (3) the dynamic nature of, and dispersed institutional responsibility for, American law, (4) the enormous amounts of money at stake in some litigation, and (5) the search for, and the forms of, relevant evidence in modern American litigation, and the impact of science and technology on both. The paper argues that, having opted for equity’s approach to the joinder of claims and parties – in part to ensure effective enforcement of rights but also in part to make such enforcement more efficient -- Americans have repeatedly turned to the tools of aggregation as a remedy for that success. In doing so, the people responsible for the courts often override the preferences of the parties (and thus the principle of party autonomy), alter the balance of power in litigation, and render trial effectively impossible. In such instances, they are creating complexity where it is not necessary for effective access to court; the stated goal of efficiency may be a delusion, and in any event aggregation can make little pretense to a goal of accuracy as opposed to dispute resolution simpliciter. Moreover, as the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 suggests, in a federal system the unremitting quest for aggregation may come at a heavy price to individual state autonomy. In sum, taken to the extremes to which Americans appear to be heading, complex litigation appears to be a cure that has become a curse.

SUGGESTED CITATION:
Stephen B. Burbank, "The Complexity of Modern American Civil Litigation: Curse or Cure?" (June 11, 2007). University of Pennsylvania Law School. Scholarship at Penn Law. Paper 166.
http://lsr.nellco.org/upenn/wps/papers/166




REPOSITORY HOME  | SEARCH  | MY ACCOUNT  | NELLCO HOME |
Powered by bepress.