April 2007 Vol. 105 No. 6 THE REVIEW

Foreword: Settler's Remorse

Floyd Abrams

Who can quarrel with the notion that settling civil cases is generally a good thing? Litigation is expensive, time-consuming, preoccupying, and often personally destructive. Our courts are overburdened and, in any event, imperfect decision-making entities. It may even be true that, more often than not, “the absolute result of a trial is not as high a quality of justice as is the freely negotiated, give a little, take a little settlement.”

But not every case should be settled. Many are worthless. The settlement of others could too easily lead to a torrent of unwarranted litigation. Sometimes, as Professor Owen Fiss has observed, parties “settle while leaving justice undone.” While few of the settlements I have been involved with can be so described, one has plagued me since I participated in negotiating it twenty-five years ago. Now, in light of very recent and deeply disturbing revelations, it plagues me still more.

   //  VIEW PDF
& Other Current Events

Writing Competition Panel Audio Recording

On Tuesday, April 4, members of the Michigan Law Review discussed the 2012 writing competition and the...

Agency and Equity: Why Do We Blame Clients for Their Lawyers' Mistakes?

If you were to ask a child whether it would be fair to execute a prisoner because his lawyer had made...

How United States v. Jones Can Restore Our Faith in the Fourth Amendment

United States v. Jones, issued in January of this year, is a landmark case that has the potential to restore...

Who's Bringing the Children?: Expanding the Family Exemption for Child Smuggling Offenses

Under immigration law, an alien smuggling offense takes place when one knowingly encourages, induces,...

How the Gun-Free School Zones Act Saved the Individual Mandate

  For all the drama surrounding the Commerce Clause challenge to the individual mandate provision...
MAILING LIST
Sign Up to Join Our Mailing List