Failures of American Civil Justice in International Perspective

Failures of American Civil Justice in International Perspective

James R. Maxeiner

Language: English

Pages: 344

ISBN: 1107693799

Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub


American civil justice fails to meet the nation's needs. America's eighteenth century founders expected of the nation's future civil justice system that everyone "ought to obtain right and justice freely, without sale, completely and without denial, promptly and without delay." Few lawyers today would say that American civil justice fulfills the founders' expectations. Some say that it is oppressive and unjust. Many have given up the goals that the founders set. America's reformers have run out of ideas. They have no proven models for fixing what they know is broken. This book provides a comparative critical introduction to civil justice systems in the United States, Germany, and Korea. It shows shortcomings of the American system and compares them with German and Korean successes. The book shows foreign systems as a source of ideas that are proven to work. The book informs general readers as well as specialists.

Constitution Making: Conflict and Consensus in the Federal Convention of 1787

Rogue Lawyer

The Run of His Life: The People v. O. J. Simpson

Access to Justice: 12 (Sociology of Crime, Law and Deviance)

The Internationalisation of Copyright Law: Books, Buccaneers and the Black Flag in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge Intellectual Property and Information Law)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

precedents are not mutually exclusive, but complementary.17 All three of our systems follow precedents in practice despite differences in theory. In the American system, theory says that precedents are binding. In the German and Korean systems, theory says that precedents are not binding. In practice, however, the three systems give most precedents similar binding effect: Precedents are followed unless there is a good reason to depart from them. An appellate court is not bound by its own

where the case occurred, and where the parties reside. Often contingent fees are waived if the case is resolved quickly in the course of provisional proceedings. Fee competition. Korean lawyers compete for clients based on fees. LawMarketAsia is an Web site that offers an auction service where lawyers bid on cases. It asserts that it saves clients 20 to 50 percent on fees. The site also provides support for parties who represent themselves. Supreme Court Rules No. 2116, amended on November 28,

Justices is the Minister of National Court Administration and is not allowed to participate in judgments rendered by the Court. The Supreme Court has the following responsibilities: • It is the court of last resort for all courts, civil, criminal, administrative, and patent, except for the Constitutional Court. • The Chief Justice designates three of the nine justices appointed by the President of Korea to the Constitutional Court. • The Chief Justice has general control over judicial

discussion, we assume that Hahn adds no additional defendants. 4.  Handling Complaints Once Hahn has prepared the complaint and obtained Roh’s approval of it, he will file it with the court. Roh will have to pay a small filing fee. In federal court, the fee is the same whether one demands $100 or $100 million (presently the fee is $350). It is rarely a deterrent to lawsuits. In Germany and Korea, on the other hand, the filing fee depends on the amount in controversy; in Roh’s case in Germany it

preclude the possibility that either party presents a surprise witness at the last moment, because the obligation to disclose continues even after the dates of the demand and of the other party’s response.40 Standard Interrogatory No. 7 helps the demanding party negotiate a settlement with a clear idea of how much money is available. Standard Interrogatories 10 and 11 are to be the bases for interrogatories that help the demanding party better understand the case, plan that party’s further

Download sample

Download