How we understand what procedure is due as a fundamental or constitutional right can have a critical impact on designing a civil procedure. Drawing on comparative law and empirically oriented methodologies, in this book the author provides a thorough analysis of how procedural due process is understood both in national jurisdictions and in the field of international human rights law. The book offers a suitable due process theory for civil matters in general, assessing the different roles that this basic international human right plays in comparison with criminal justice. In this regard, it argues that the civil justice conception of due process has grown under the shadow of criminal justice for too long. Moreover, the theory answers the question of what the basic requirements are concerning the right to a fair trial on civil matters, i.e., the question of what we can and cannot sacrifice when designing a civil procedure that correctly distributes the risk of moral harm while remaining accessible to people with complex and simple legal needs, in order to reconcile the requirements of procedural fairness with social demands for justice. This book makes a valuable contribution to the field of civil justice, legal design, and access to justice by providing an empirically based normative theory regarding the right to a fair trial. As such, it will be of interest to a broad audience: policymakers, practitioners and judges, but also researchers and scholars interested in theoretical questions in jurisprudence, and those familiar with empirical legal studies, comparative law, and other socio-legal studies.

A comparative and collaborative study of the foundational principles and concepts that underpin different domestic systems of criminal law.

An eye-opening look at the influential Supreme Court justice who disrupted American jurisprudence in order to delegitimize opponents and establish a conservative legal order

The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.

This book examines the right to a neutral and detached decisionmaker as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court. This right resides in the Constitution’s Fifth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment guarantees to procedural due process and in the Sixth Amendment’s promise of an impartial jury. Supreme Court cases on these topics are the vehicles to understand how these constitutional rights have come alive. First, the book surveys the right to an impartial jury in criminal cases by telling the stories of defendants whose convictions were overturned after they were the victims of prejudicial pretrial publicity, mob justice, and discriminatory jury selection. Next, the book articulates how our modern notion of judicial impartiality was forged by the Court striking down cases where judges were bribed, where they had other direct financial stakes in the outcome of the case, and where a judge decided the case of a major campaign supporter. Finally, the book traces the development of the right to a neutral decisionmaker in quasi-judicial, non-court settings, including cases involving parole revocation, medical license review, mental health commitments, prison discipline, and enemy combatants. Each chapter begins with the typically shocking facts of these cases being retold, and each chapter ends with a critical examination of the Supreme Court’s ultimate decisions in these cases.