We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Introduction: Trial by Jury or Trial by Motion? Summary Judgment, Iqbal, and Employment Discrimination.
- Authors
LEONARD, ARTHUR S.
- Abstract
The New York Law School Law Review's Spring 2012 symposium, Trial by Jury or Trial by Motion? Summary Judgment, Iqbal, and Employment Discrimination, was planned jointly with the Employee Rights Advocacy Institute For Law & Policy (the "Institute"). This collection of articles drawn from the symposium focuses on pretrial motion practice in employment discrimination cases, with particular emphasis on the impact of U.S. Supreme Court decisions making it more likely that cases would be dismissed in response to pretrial motions. The event brought together practitioners, judges, and academic scholars to consider the litigation landscape at a time of heightened pleading requirements, particularly in light of two Supreme Court decisions, Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly1 and Ashcroft v. Iqbal.2 Although neither of these was an employment discrimination case, they appeared to establish new "plausibility" pleading standards for federal civil litigation that could make it more difficult for cases to survive a motion to dismiss, and thus less likely that plaintiffs would be able to engage in pretrial discovery.3 These developments followed earlier Supreme Court decisions that encouraged federal trial courts to dispose of more cases in response to pretrial motions for summary judgment,4 and seemed inconsistent with the Court's unanimous decision in Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A.,5 which arguably described a more liberal pleading standard.
- Subjects
EMPLOYMENT discrimination; NEW York Law School; EMPLOYEE rights; UNITED States. Supreme Court; BELL Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly; ASHCROFT v. Iqbal; SWIERKIEWICZ v. Sorema NA (Supreme Court case)
- Publication
New York Law School Law Review, 2013, Vol 57, Issue 4, p659
- ISSN
0145-448X
- Publication type
Article