Stanford Journal of Complex Litigation (SJCL)


sjcl The Stanford Journal of Complex Litigation (SJCL) was founded in 2012 and is the only law journal in the country focusing exclusively on complex litigation. The student-run, peer-reviewed journal printsarticles by professors, practitioners, and students on a range of legal topics relating to complex litigation, including civil procedure, aggregate litigation, and mass torts.

Current Issue

Volume 2 , Issue 1

Articles

In Search of the Most Adequate Forum: State Court Personal Jurisdiction

Geoffrey P. Miller
To what extent do the rules on state court personal jurisdiction distribute litigation to the forum that can resolve the dispute at the lowest social cost? It turns out that current rules do select the least-cost forum in many cases. However, three problems interfere with the goal of minimizing the costs of dispute resolution: (a) Analysis under the Due Process Clause does not account for the full social costs of litigation; (b) Federalism-based concerns sometimes allow state courts to adjudicate cases when they are not the most adequate forums; and (c) Institutional factors constrain the Supreme Court’s ability to prevent excessive exercises of state court jurisdiction. The dilemma of achieving forum efficiency within the existing legal and institutional framework helps to explain the confusion that pervades the Supreme Court’s state court personal jurisdiction cases.
  • January 2014
  • 2 Stan. J. Complex Litig. 1
  • Article

The New Conflicts Law

David L. Noll
The deterrent and remedial power of civil litigation in U.S. courts is justifiably famous. But as Kiobel and other cases underscore, such litigation is only one of many possible ways to regulate harms that affect multiple sovereigns. Globalization, increased cross-border activity, and the lightweight limits on extraterritorial jurisdiction imposed by international law combine to create an environment in which it is common for multiple legal systems to regulate a single course of conduct. When sovereigns disagree over how to regulate harm, the ensuing conflicts expose U.S. legal systems to a new and unfamiliar form of political backlash.
  • January 2014
  • 2 Stan. J. Complex Litig. 40
  • Article

Navigating the Stormy Skies: Blue Sky Statutes & Conflict of Laws

Danielle Beth Rosenthal
As in no other area of choice-of-law jurisprudence, courts have rejected ap-plication of conflicts principles to Blue Sky claims. This Article examines this “Blue Sky exception” to traditional conflicts law on two levels. First, this Article takes a value-neutral perspective to examine the rationales that courts have put forth in favor of this approach, concluding that these justifications lack persuasive force and, at times, even rely on incorrect statements of positive law. Next, switching to a normative analysis, the Article argues that the Blue Sky exception is undesirable as a matter of public policy, given its inconsistency with the principles, objectives, and values that underlie modern choice-of-law jurisprudence.
  • January 2014
  • 2 Stan. J. Complex Litig. 96
  • Article

From Kiobel Back to Structural Reform: The Hidden Legacy of Holocaust Restitution Litigation

Leora Bilsky
Rodger D. Citron
Natalie R. Davidson
This Article offers a new approach to the issue of transnational cor-porate liability for human rights violations and more generally an inquiry into the place of domestic legal experiences in theorizing about transna-tional law. Grounded in a study of the Holocaust restitution litigation of the 1990s, the authors explain corporate liability as a type of bureaucratic liability and explore in depth the relationship between the Holocaust litigation and the theory of structural reform litigation developed in the U.S. to address the bureaucratic structure of rights violations. They read the restitution litigation in light of pluralist reformulations of structural reform, in which norms are not enunciated in a hierarchical manner by the judge but are produced contextually through dialogue between court and parties. The authors use this analysis to challenge contemporary theoretical treatments of transnational corporate responsibility for human rights violations and suggest more promising directions for theorization.
  • January 2014
  • 2 Stan. J. Complex Litig. 138
  • Article