Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T18:38:01.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Local Legal Culture and the Control of Litigation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2024

Herbert M. Kritzer  and
Frances Kahn Zemans
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In 1983, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were modified to mandate sanctions against attorneys who filed frivolous pleadings or motions or who failed to make reasonable efforts to verify facts or statements of law made in pleadings or motions. There is substantial variation among federal judicial districts in the use of this Rule 11 provision. To what degree can these variations be explained by situational or legal factors? Does one need to use a concept such as local legal culture to account for at least some of the variation? These are the questions addressed by this article. We find that variations in most Rule 11-related activities can be explained by structural and situational factors. We conclude that beyond the expectations created by specific structural and legal factors, one does not need to resort to local legal culture to explain Rule 11-related phenomena. We suggest that the conditions that make local legal culture a useful construct in the context of the criminal courts may not apply in the civil justice system.

Type
Articles on Culture and Compliance
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , 1993 , pp. 535 - 557
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 by The Law and Society Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This report was originally prepared for presentation at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, 9–11 April 1992. We would like to acknowledge the significant contribution of Lawrence Marshall to the Rule 11 study from which this paper is drawn. This research was conducted under the auspices of the American Judicature Society and was made possible by the generous financial support of the M. R. Bauer Foundation, the West Publishing Company, the Ninth Circuit Attorney Admission Fund, the Illinois Bar Foundation, the Dallas Bar Foundation, the Indiana Bar Foundation, and the Aetna Foundation, Inc.

References

Church, Thomas W. (1985) “Examining Local Legal Culture,” 1985 ABF Research J. 449.Google Scholar
Church, Thomas W. Jr., Carlson, Alan, Lee, Jo-Lynne, & Tan, Teresa (1978) Justice Delayed: The Pace of Litigation in Urban Trial Courts. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
Clermont, Kevin M., & Eisenberg, Theodore (1992) “Trial by Jury or Judge: Transcending Empiricism,” 77 Cornell Law Rev. 1124.Google Scholar
Daniels, Stephen (1990) “Caseload Dynamics and the Nature of Change: The Civil Business of Trial Courts in Four Illinois Counties,” 24 Law & Society Rev. 299.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, James, Flemming, Roy B., and Nardulli, Peter F. (1988) The Contours of Justice: Communities and Their Courts. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, James, & Jacob, Herbert (1977) Felony Justice: An Organizational Analysis of Criminal Courts. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.Google Scholar
Federal Judicial Center (1991) Rule 11: Final Report to the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules of the Judicial Conference of the United States. Washington: Federal Judicial Center.Google Scholar
Flemming, Roy B., Nardulli, Peter F., and Eisenstein, James (1993) The Craft of Justice: Politics and Work in Criminal Court Communities. Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Fox, John (1991) Regression Diagnostics. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Lawrence M., & Percival, Robert V. (1976) “A Tale of Two Courts: Litigation in Alameda and San Benito Counties,” 10 Law & Society Rev. 267.Google Scholar
Grossman, Joel B., Kritzer, Herbert M., Bumiller, Kristin, & McDougal, Stephen (1981) “Measuring the Pace of Civil Litigation in Federal and State Trial Courts,” 65 Judicature 86.Google Scholar
Grossman, Joel B., Kritzer, Herbert M., Bumiller, Kristin, Sarat, Austin, McDougal, Stephen, & Miller, Richard (1982) “Dimensions of Institutional Participation: Who Uses the Courts and How?” 44 J. of Politics 86.Google Scholar
Grossman, Joel B., & Sarat, Austin (1971) “Political Culture and Judicial Research,” 1971 Washington Univ. Law Q. 177.Google Scholar
Heumann, Milton (1978) Plea Bargaining: The Experiences of Prosecutors, Judges, and Defense Attorneys. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, Donald W., & Riddlesperger, James W. Jr. (1991) “Money and Politics in Judicial Elections: The 1988 Election of the Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court,” 74 Judicature 184.Google Scholar
Kagan, Robert A., Cartwright, Bliss, Friedman, Lawrence M., & Wheeler, Stanton (1977) “The Business of State Supreme Courts, 1870–1970,” 30 Stanford Law Rev. 121.Google Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert M. (1979) “Political Cultures, Trial Courts, and Criminal Cases,” in Nardulli, Peter F., ed., The Study of Criminal Courts: Political Perspectives. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert M. (1982) “The Judge's Role in Pretrial Case Processing: Assessing the Need for Change,” 66 Judicature 28.Google Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert M. (1990) The Justice Broker: Lawyers and Ordinary Litigation. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert M., Bogart, W. A., & Vidmar, Neil (1991) “The Aftermath of Injury: Cultural Factors in Compensation Seeking in Canada and the United States,” 25 Law & Society Rev. 499.Google Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert M., Marshall, Lawrence, & Zemans, Frances Kahn (1991) “Rule 11 Study: Preliminary Analysis.” American Judicature Society, mimeo.Google Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert M., Marshall, Lawrence, & Zemans, Frances Kahn (1992) “Rule 11: Moving beyond the Cosmic Anecdote,” 75 Judicature 269.Google Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert M., Zemans, Frances K., & Marshall, Lawrence C. (1991) “Taming the Litigious Tiger: The Use and Impact of Rule 11 Sanctions in the Federal Court.” Presented at American Political Science Association annual meetings, Washington, DC, 29 Aug.-l Sept.Google Scholar
Landon, Donald D. (1985) “Clients, Colleagues, and Community: The Shaping of Zealous Advocacy in Country Law Practice,” 1985 ABF Research J. 81.Google Scholar
Landon, Donald D. (1990) Country Lawyers The Impact of Context on Professional Practice. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Levin, Martin A. (1972) “Urban Politics and Judicial Behavior,” 1 J. of Legal Studies 193.Google Scholar
Levin, Martin A. (1977) Urban Politics and the Criminal Courts. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lipson, Albert (1984) California Enacts Prejudgment Interest: A Case Study of Legislative Action. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Institute for Civil Justice.Google Scholar
Mann, Kenneth (1985) Defending White-Collar Crime: A Portrait of Attorneys at Work. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, Lawrence C., Kritzer, Herbert M., & Zemans, Frances Kahn (1992) “The Use and Impact of Rule 11,” 86 Northwestern Law Rev. 943.Google Scholar
Mather, Lynn M. (1974) “Some Determinants of the Method of Case Disposition: Decision-Making by Public Defenders in Los Angeles,” 8 Law & Society Rev. 187.Google Scholar
Mather, Lynn M. (1979) Plea-Bargaining or Trial? The Process of Criminal-Case Disposition. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
McIntyre, Lisa J. (1987) The Public Defender: The Practice of Law in the Shadows of Repute. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Nardulli, Peter F. (1978) The Courtroom Elite: An Organizational Perspective on Criminal Justice. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Nardulli, Peter F., Eisenstein, James, & Flemming, Roy B. (1988) The Tenor of Justice: Criminal Courts and the Guilty Plea Process. Urbana: Univ. of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Ross, H. Laurence (1970) Settled Out of Court: The Social Process of Insurance Claims Adjustment. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Schiller, Stephen A., & Manikas, Peter M. (1987) “Criminal Courts and Local Legal Culture,” 36 DePaul Law Rev. 305.Google Scholar
Schulhofer, Stephen J. (1984) “Is Plea Bargaining Inevitable?” 97 Harvard Law Rev. 1037.Google Scholar
Schulhofer, Stephen J. (1985) “No Job Too Small: Justice without Bargaining in the Lower Criminal Courts,” 1985 ABF Research J. 519.Google Scholar
Sherwood, David R., and Clarke, Mark A. (1981) “Toward an Understanding of Local Legal Culture,” 6 Justice System J. 200.Google Scholar
Utz, Pamela J. (1978) Settling the Facts: Discretion and Negotiation in Criminal Court. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Watson, Richard A., & Downing, Rondal G. (1969) The Politics of the Bench and Bar: Judicial Selection under the Missouri Nonpartisan Court Plan. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
White, Welsh S. (1971) “A Proposal for Reform of the Plea Bargaining Process,” 119 Univ. of Pennsylvania Law Rev. 439.Google Scholar
Wiggins, Elizabeth C., Willging, Thomas E., & Stienstra, Donna (1991) “Rule 11 Activity in the Federal Courts,” FJC Directions, No. 2, p. 6.Google Scholar