Основные причины кризиса судопроизводства по гражданским делам в США второй половины ХХ — начала XХI в.
https://doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2020.158.1.132-143
Резюме
Ключевые слова
Об авторе
Д. В. КнязевРоссия
Князев Дмитрий Владимирович, кандидат юридических наук, доцент, заведующий кафедрой гражданского процессуального права (г. Томск),
доцент кафедры гражданского процесса Юридического института
Список литературы
1. Князев Д. В. Плидирование по правилам общего права в гражданском процессе США // Журнал зарубежного законодательства и сравнительного правоведения. — 2018. — № 4.
2. Clermont K. M., Currivan J. D. Improving on the Contingent Fee // Cornell Law Faculty Publications. — 1978. — Paper 268. — P. 571.
3. Cook W. W. Statements of Fact in Pleading under the Codes // Columbia Law Abstract. — 1921. — № 21.
4. Corboy P. H. Contingency Fees: The Individual’s Key to the Courthouse Door // Litigation. — Summer 1976. — Pp. 27—30.
5. Derek C. B. A Flawed System of Law Practice and Training // Journal of Legal Education. — 1983. — Vol. 33, No. 4.
6. Easterbrook F. H. Comment, Discovery as Abuse // Boston University Law Abstract. — 1989. — № 69.
7. Friedman L. M. The Six Million Dollar Man: Litigation and Rights Consciousness in Modern America // Maryland Law Abstract. — 1980. — № 39.
8. Galanter M. An Oil Strike In Hell: Contemporary Legends About The Civil Justice System // Arizona Law Abstract. — 1998. — Vol. 40.
9. Galanter M. The Day After the Litigation Explosion // Maryland Law Abstract. — 1986. — № 46.
10. Galanter M. The Vanishing Trial: An Examination of Trials and Related Matters in Federal and State Courts // Journal of Empirical Legal Studies. — 2004. — № 1 (3).
11. Garry P. M. A nation of adversaries: how the litigation explosion is reshaping America. — New York : Plenum Press, 1997.
12. Hensler D. R. Trends in Tort Litigation: Findings from the Institute for Civil Justice’s Research // Ohio State Law Journal. — 1987. — Vol. 48, No. 2.
13. Horowitz M. Making Ethics Real, Making Ethics Work: A Proposal for Contingency Fee Reform // Emory Law Journal. — 1995. — № 44.
14. Inselbuch E. Contingent fees and tort reform: A reassessment and reality Check // Law and contemporary problems. — 2001. — Vol. 64: nos. 2 & 3.
15. Johnston M. D. The Litigation Explosion, Proposed Reforms, and their Consequences // BYU Journal Of Public Law. — 2007. — № 21. — P. 180.
16. Kaufman I. R. Reform for a System in Crisis: Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Federal Courts // Fordham Law Rev. — 1990. — № 59.
17. Kaufman I. R. The Philosophy of Effective Judicial Supervision Over Litigation // Federal Rules Decisions. — 1962. — № 29.
18. Kritzer H. M. Contingency Fee Lawyers As Gatekeepers In The American Civil Justice System // Judicature. — Vol. 81, No 1. — URL: https://faculty.polisci.wisc.edu/kritzer/research/contfee/gatekeep.htm#Sidebar.
19. Kritzer H. M. Seven Dogged Myths Concerning Contingency Fees // Washington University Law Quarterly. — 2002. — № 80.
20. Main T. O., Subrin S. N. The Fourth Era of American Civil Procedure // University of Pennsylvania Law Abstract. — 2014. — № 162.
21. Manning B. Hyperlexis: Our National Disease // Northwestern University Law Abstract. — 1977. — № 71.
22. Meier B. Math of a Class-Action Suit: ‘Winning’ $2.19 Costs $91.33 // New York Times. — November 21, 1995. — Section A. — P. 1. — URL: https://www.nytimes.com/1995/11/21/us/math-of-a-class-action-suitwinning-2.19-costs-91.33.html.
23. Miceli T. J. Do Contingent Fees Promote Excessive Litigation? // The Journal of Legal Studies. — 1994. — Vol. 23, No. 1. — P. 223.
24. Miller A. The august 1983 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Federal Judicial Center 1984). P. 9 // URL: https://www.fjc.gov/sites/default/files/2012/1983Amnds.pdf.
25. Miller A. R. The Adversary System: Dinosaur or Phoenix // Minnesota Law Abstract. — 1984. — Vol. 69:1.
26. Miller A. R. The Pretrial Rush to Judgment: Are the «Litigation Explosion», «Liability Crisis», and Efficiency Clichés Eroding Our Day in Court and Jury Trial Commitments? // New York University Law Abstract. — 2003. — № 78.
27. Sarat A. The Litigation Explosion, Access to Justice, and Court Reform: Examining the Critical Assumptions // Rutgers Law Rev. — 1985. — № 87. — P. 320.
28. Subrin S. Fishing Expeditions Allowed: The Historical Background of the 1938 Federal Discovery Rules // Boston College Law Abstract. — 1998. — № 39.
29. Yamamoto E. K. Case Management and the Hawaii Courts: The Evolving Role of the Managerial Judge in Civil Litigation // University of Hawaii Law Abstract. — 1987. — № 9.
Рецензия
Для цитирования:
Князев Д.В. Основные причины кризиса судопроизводства по гражданским делам в США второй половины ХХ — начала XХI в. Lex russica. 2020;73(1):132-144. https://doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2020.158.1.132-143
For citation:
Knyazev D.V. Main Reasons for the Crisis in the United States Civil Litigation in the Second Half of the Twentieth — Early Twenty-First Century. Lex Russica. 2020;73(1):132-144. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2020.158.1.132-143