Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2347360
 


 



Plaintiphobia in the Supreme Court


Kevin M. Clermont


Cornell Law School

Theodore Eisenberg


Cornell University - Law School

December 26, 2013

University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 162, No. 7, 2014

Abstract:     
Through the years debate has raged over whether the Supreme Court’s summary judgment trilogy and Twombly-Iqbal pleading decisions had significant practical effects. To address that question, this article introduces a new empirical measure: the difference between the pretrial-adjudication judgment rates for the defendant and for the plaintiff. Plotting that rates’ difference over time suggests that the cases on summary judgment and pleading, which were far and away the two most major alterations of pretrial disposition during the last three decades, had a markedly anti-plaintiff impact.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 17

Keywords: civil procedure, pleading, summary judgment, empirical

JEL Classification: K40, K41

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: October 31, 2013 ; Last revised: January 14, 2014

Suggested Citation

Clermont, Kevin M. and Eisenberg, Theodore, Plaintiphobia in the Supreme Court (December 26, 2013). University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 162, No. 7, 2014. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2347360 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2347360

Contact Information

Kevin M. Clermont (Contact Author)
Cornell Law School ( email )
Myron Taylor Hall
Ithaca, NY 14853
United States
607-255-5189 (Phone)
607-255-7193 (Fax)
Theodore Eisenberg
Cornell University - Law School ( email )
524 College Ave
Myron Taylor Hall
Ithaca, NY 14853
United States
607-255-6477 (Phone)
607-255-7193 (Fax)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 430
Downloads: 130
Download Rank: 129,770

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.266 seconds