The Standard for Measuring the Validity of a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure: The Shady Grove Debate between Justices Scalia and Stevens

Ides, Allan

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1667228

Abstract

Download This Paper | Share | Email |Add to Briefcase | Purchase Bound Hard Copy

The Standard for Measuring the Validity of a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure: The Shady Grove Debate between Justices Scalia and Stevens

Allan Ides

Loyola Law School Los Angeles

August 27, 2010

Loyola-LA Legal Studies Paper No. 2010-36

Abstract:
In Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. Allstate Insurance Company, Justices Scalia and Stevens offered alternative interpretations of §2072(b) of the Rules Enabling Act (“REA”). The focus of this essay is on that disagreement. The author argues that both the text of the REA and judicial precedent support the Stevens interpretation.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 20

working papers series

Download This Paper

Date posted: August 30, 2010

Suggested Citation

Ides, Allan, The Standard for Measuring the Validity of a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure: The Shady Grove Debate between Justices Scalia and Stevens (August 27, 2010). Loyola-LA Legal Studies Paper No. 2010-36. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1667228 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1667228

Contact Information

Allan Ides (Contact Author)

Loyola Law School Los Angeles ( email )

919 Albany Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015-1211
United States
213-736-1464 (Phone)
213-380-3769 (Fax)