• Research
  • Publications
    • --How to Sue a Robot
    • --Constitutional Policing and Compromise
    • --The Clash of Procedural Values
    • --Twombly and Iqbal at the State Level
    • --Transferred Justice: An Empirical Account of Federal Transfers in the Wake of Atlantic Marine
    • --Trans-Personal Procedures
    • --Rights come with Responsibilities: Personal Jurisdiction and Corporate Personhood
    • --Pleading and Proving Foreign Law in the Age of Plausibility Pleading
    • --Tremors of Things to Come: The Great Split between Federal and State Pleading Standards
    • --Assessing Iqbal after One Year: Effects and Proposals
    • --Creon's Secretaries: The Conceptual Foundations of the Procedural State
  • Teaching
  • Personal
  • Contact

Pleading and Proving Foreign Law in the Age of Plausibility Pleading

Using a comparative and historical approach, this article argues that court systems typically structure the pleading of foreign law according to adversarial or inquisitorial norms. The U.S. model draws on both of these distinct traditions in its approach to questions of pleading and proving foreign law. The article argues that this hybrid approach runs the risk of conceptual incoherence. Pre-existing tensions in the doctrine of pleading foreign law have now been heightened, perhaps to a breaking point, by the recent rise of plausibility pleading. Furthermore, plausibility pleading as applied to foreign law raises important questions about the doctrinal coherence of the post-Iqbal pleading regime.
(cited in
Wright & Miller: Federal Practice & Procedure
)

Preferred citation: Roger Michalski, Pleading and Proving Foreign Law in the Age of Plausibility Pleading, 59
Buff. L. Rev.
1207 (2011).

  Download as pdf

Questions? Suggestions?

Please contact me if you can't find something or have a comment, thought, or question.

Contact
Michalski -