The upside of losing

Columbia Law Review

Volumn 113, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 817-862

  Depoorter, Ben ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84877611104     PISSN: 00101958     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (119)

1. Ackerman, Bruce, We the People: Foundations vol. 1 (1991).
2. Albiston, Catherine, The Rule of Law and the Litigation Process: The Paradox of Losing by Winning, 33 Law & Soc'y Rev. 869 (1999).
3. Alfieri, Anthony V., Reconstructive Poverty Law Practice: Learning Lessons of Client Narrative, 100 Yale L.J. 2107 (1991).
4. Aviv, Rachel, File-Sharing Students Fight Copyright Constraints, N.Y. Times, Oct. 10, 2007, at B7.
5. Baker, Carrie N., The Women's Movement Against Sexual Harassment (2008).
6. Balkin, Jack M. & Reva B. Siegel, Principles, Practices, and Social Movements, 154 U. Pa. L. Rev. 927 (2006).
7. Barnett, Randy E., Constitutional Law: Cases in Context (2008).
8. Bell, Abraham & Gideon Parchomovsky, Takings Reassessed, 87 Va. L. Rev. 277 (2001).
9. Bell, Abraham & Gideon Parchomovsky, The Uselessness of Public Use, 106 Colum. L. Rev. 1412 (2006).
10. Benford, Robert D. & David A. Snow, Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment, 26 Ann. Rev. Soc. 611 (2000).
11. Boutcher, Steven A., Making Lemonade: Turning Adverse Decisions into Opportunities for Mobilization, Amici (Am. Sociological Assoc., Washington, D.C.), Fall 2005, at 8.
12. Brooks, Rosa, Op-Ed., It's Open Season on Private Property, L.A. Times, July 27, 2005, at B13.
13. Buckingham, Steven E., Comment, The Kelo Threshold: Private Property and Public Use Reconsidered, 39 U. Rich. L. Rev. 1279 (2005).
14. Chayes, Abram, The Role of the Judge in Public Law Litigation, 89 Harv. L. Rev. 1281 (1976).
15. Chemerinsky, Erwin, Constitutional Law (3d ed. 2009).
16. Christie, Les, Kelo's Revenge: Voters Restrict Eminent Domain, CNNMoney.com (Nov. 8, 2006, 11:21 AM), http://money.cnn.com/2006/11/08/real_estate/kelos_revenge.
17. Cohen, Carl, The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 105 Mich. L. Rev. First Impressions 117 (2007), http://www.michiganlawreview.org/assets/fi/105/cohen.pdf.
18. Cooter, Robert, The Cost of Coase, 11 J. Legal Stud. 1 (1982).
19. Cooter, Robert & Thomas Ulen, Law and Economics (3d. ed. 2000).
20. Cross, Frank B. & Stefanie A. Lindquist, The Scientific Study of Judicial Activism, 91 Minn. L. Rev. 1752 (2007).
21. Daughety, Andrew F. & Jennifer F. Reinganum, Hush Money, 30 RAND J. Econ. 661 (1999).
22. Daughety, Andrew F. & Jennifer F. Reinganum, Informational Externalities in Settlement Bargaining: Confidentiality and Correlated Culpability, 33 RAND J. Econ. 587 (2002).
23. Ellickson, Robert C., Order Without Law: How Neighbors Settle Disputes (1991).
24. Epstein, Richard A., Public Use in a Post-Kelo World, 17 Supreme Ct. Econ. Rev. 151 (2009).
25. Epstein, Richard A., Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain (1985).
26. Erikson, Robert S., et al., Statehouse Democracy: Public Opinion and Policy in the American States (1994).
27. Eskridge, Jr., William N., No Promo Homo: The Sedimentation of Antigay Discourse and the Channeling Effect of Judicial Review, 75 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 1327 (2000).
28. Eskridge, Jr., William N., Pluralism and Distrust: How Courts Can Support Democracy by Lowering the Stakes of Politics, 114 Yale L.J. 1279 (2005).
29. Ewick, Patricia & Susan S. Silbey, The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life (1998).
30. Farnsworth, Ward, Do Parties to Nuisance Cases Actually Bargain After Judgment? A Glimpse Inside the Cathedral, 66 U. Chi. L. Rev. 373 (1999).
31. Figinski, M. Albert, Op-Ed., Eminent Domain, Regulatory Takings: A Fifth Amendment Update, Daily Rec. (Balt.), Dec. 10, 2004, at 4B.
32. Fiss, Owen M., The Supreme Court, 1978 Term-Foreword: The Forms of Justice, 93 Harv. L. Rev. 1 (1979).
33. Fried, Charles, Order and Law (1991).
34. Galanter, Marc, Why the Haves Come Out Ahead: Speculation on the Limits of Legal Change, 9 Law & Soc'y Rev. 95 (1974).
35. Gerstel, Deborah R. & Adam G. Segall, Conference Report: Human Rights in American Courts, 1 Am. U. J. Int'l L. & Pol'y 137 (1986).
36. Gilles Stephen G., The Judgment-Proof Society, 63 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 603 (2006).
37. Goldberg-Hiller, Jonathan, The Limits to Union: Same-Sex Marriage and the Politics of Civil Rights (2002).
38. Goodman, John C., An Economic Theory of the Evolution of Common Law, 7 J. Legal Stud. 393 (1979).
39. Gordon, Jennifer, Suburban Sweatshops (2005).
40. Gould, John P., The Economics of Legal Conflicts, 2 J. Legal Stud. 279 (1973).
41. Greenberg Jack, Litigation for Social Change: Methods, Limits and Role in Democracy, in 29 Rec. Ass'n B. City N.Y., at 320 (1974).
42. Guinier Lani, The Triumph of Tokenism: The Voting Rights Act and the Theory of Black Electoral Success, 89 Mich. L. Rev. 1077 (1990).
43. Hadfield Gillian, Biases in the Evolution of Legal Rules, 80 Geo. L.J. 583 (1992).
44. Haltom William & Michael W. McCann, Distorting the Law: Politics, Mass Media, and the Litigation Crisis (2004).
45. Handler Joel F., Social Movements and the Legal System: A Theory of Law Reform and Social Change (1978).
46. Hay Bruce L., Effort, Information, Settlement, Trial, 24 J. Legal Stud. 29 (1995).
47. Inst. for Justice, Five Years After Kelo: The Sweeping Backlash Against One of the Supreme Court's Most-Despised Decisions (2010), available at http://www.ij.org/images/pdf_folder/private_property/kelo/kelo5year_ann-white_paper.pdf.
48. Interview with Scott Bullock, Attorney, Inst. for Justice, at Univ. of Miami Law Sch., Coral Gables, Fla. (Oct. 6, 2006).
49. Jansen, Jaime, Eminent Domain Restrictions Approved in 9 States, Rejected in 3, Jurist (Nov. 8, 2006, 2:04 PM), http://jurist.org/paperchase/2006/11/eminent-domain-restrictions-approved.php.
50. Katyal, Sonia K., Property Outlaws: How Squatters, Pirates, and Protesters Improve the Law of Ownership (2010).
51. Kerr, Orin S., Upholding the Law, Legal Affairs (Mar./Apr. 2003), http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/March-April-2003/feature_marapr03_kerr.msp.
52. Kessler, Daniel, et al., Explaining Deviations from the Fifty-Percent Rule: A Multimodal Approach to the Selection of Cases for Litigation, 25 J. Legal Stud. 233 (1996).
53. Klarman, Michael J., Brown and Lawrence (and Goodridge), 104 Mich. L. Rev. 431 (2005).
54. Klarman, Michael J., Fidelity, Indeterminacy, and the Problem of Constitutional Evil, 65 Fordham L. Rev. 1739 (1997).
55. Klarman, Michael J., From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality (2004).
56. Kliff Sarah, Remember Roe! How Can the Next Generation Defend Abortion Rights When They Don't Think Abortion Rights Need Defending?, Newsweek, Apr. 26, 2010, at 38.
57. Koh Harold Hongju, Transnational Public Law Litigation, 100 Yale L.J. 2347 (1991).
58. Kramer, Larry D., The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism and Judicial Review (2004).
59. Landes, William M., An Economic Analysis of the Courts, 14 J.L. & Econ. 61 (1971).
60. Lee, Evan Tsen, Deconstitutionalizing Justiciability: The Example of Mootness, 105 Harv. L. Rev. 603 (1992).
61. Levitsky, Sandra R., To Lead with Law: Reassessing the Influence of Legal Advocacy Organizations in Social Movements, in Cause Lawyers and Social Movements 145 (Austin Sarat & Stuart A. Scheingold eds., 2006).
62. Litman, Jessica, Copyright Legislation and Technological Change, 68 Or. L. Rev. 275 (1989).
63. Lobel Jules, Courts as Forums for Protest, 52 UCLA L. Rev. 477 (2004).
64. Lobel Jules, Losers, Fools & Prophets: Justice as Struggle, 80 Cornell L. Rev. 1331 (1995).
65. Lobel Jules, Success Without Victory: Lost Legal Battles and the Long Road to Justice in America (2003).
66. Lobel Orly, The Paradox of Extralegal Activism: Critical Legal Consciousness and Transformative Politics, 120 Harv. L. Rev. 937 (2007).
67. Lobel Orly, Reflections on Equality, Adjudication, and the Regulation of Sexuality at Work: A Response to Kim Yuracko, 43 San Diego L. Rev. 899 (2006).
68. LoPucki Lynn M., The Death of Liability, 106 Yale L.J. 1 (1996).
69. Luban, David, Settlements and the Erosion of the Public Realm, 83 Geo. L.J. 2619 (1995).
70. MacCaulay, Stewart, Non-Contractual Relations in Business: A Preliminary Study, 28 Am. Soc. Rev. 1 (1963).
71. Mann, Ted, City Releases Fort Trumbull Settlements: State Kicked In an Additional $2.3 Million, Day (New London) (Aug. 22, 2006), http://www.theday.com/article/20060822/DAYARC/308229953/.
72. McCann, Michael W., How Does Law Matter for Social Movements?, in How Does Law Matter? 76 (Bryant G. Garth & Austin Sarat eds., 1998).
73. McCann, Michael W., Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization (1994).
74. McCann, Michael W., Taking Reform Seriously: Perspectives on Public Interest Liberalism (1986).
75. McCann, Michael & Helena Silverstein, Rethinking Law's Allurements: A Relational Analysis of Social Movement Lawyers in the United States, in Cause Lawyering: Political Commitments and Professional Responsibilities 261 (Austin Sarat & Stuart Scheingold eds., 1998).
76. Merrill, Thomas W., The Economics of Public Use, 72 Cornell L. Rev. 61 (1986).
77. Merry, Sally Engle, Everyday Understandings of the Law in Working-Class America, 13 Am. Ethnologist 253 (1986).
78. Mnookin, Robert H. & Lewis Kornhauser, Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: The Case of Divorce, 88 Yale L.J. 950 (1979).
79. Naughton, John, Mickey Mouse Threatens To Block All Ideas in Future, The Observer (Feb. 23, 2002), http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2002/feb/24/business.columnists.
80. NeJaime, Douglas, Winning Through Losing, 96 Iowa L. Rev. 941 (2011).
81. Nichols on Eminent Domain vol. 2A (Julius L. Sackman ed., 3d ed. 2002).
82. Norton, Rick, The Suppression of Lesbian and Gay History (Feb. 12, 2005), http://rictornorton.co.uk/suppress.htm.
83. Parisi, Francesco, Rent-Seeking Through Litigation: Adversarial and Inquisitorial Systems Compared, 22 Int'l Rev. L. & Econ. 193 (2002).
84. Persily, Nathaniel, Patrick Egan & Kevin Wallsten, Gay Rights, in Public Opinion and Constitutional Controversy 234 (Nathaniel Persily, Jack Citrin & Patrick J. Egan eds., 2008).
85. Post, Robert & Reva Siegel, Roe Rage: Democratic Constitutionalism and Backlash, 42 Harv. C.R.-C.L. L. Rev. 373 (2007).
86. Preston, Stephanie D. & Frans B.M. de Waal, Empathy: Its Ultimate and Proximate Bases, 25 Behav. & Brain Sci. 1 (2002).
87. Priest, George L., The Common Law Process and the Selection of Efficient Rules, 6 J. Legal Stud. 65 (1977).
88. Priest, George L., Selective Characteristics of Litigation, 9 J. Legal Stud. 399 (1980).
89. Priest, George L. & Benjamin Klein, The Selection of Disputes for Litigation, 13 J. Legal Stud. 1 (1984).
90. Rosenberg, Gerald N., The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? (2d ed. 2008).
91. Rosman, Michael, Uncertain Direction: The Legacy of Gratz and Grutter, Jurist Online (Sept. 5, 2003), http://www.cir-usa.org/articles/167.html.
92. Rubin, Paul H., Why Is the Common Law Efficient?, 6 J. Legal Stud. 51 (1977).
93. Rubin, Paul H. & Martin J. Bailey, The Role of Lawyers in Changing the Law, 23 J. Legal Stud. 807 (1994).
94. Sabel, Charles F. & William H. Simon, Destabilization Rights: How Public Law Litigation Succeeds, 117 Harv. L. Rev. 1016 (2004).
95. Sanchirico, Chris William, Taxes Versus Legal Rules as Instruments for Equity: A More Equitable View, 29 J. Legal Stud. 797 (2000).
96. Sarat, Austin D., Redirecting Legal Scholarship in Law Schools, 12 Yale J.L. & Human. 129 (2000) (book review).
97. Sargentich, Lewis, Complex Enforcement (1978).
98. Scheingold, Stuart A., The Politics of Rights: Lawyers, Public Policy, and Political Change (1974).
99. Shavell, Steven, Suit, Settlement and Trial: A Theoretical Analysis Under Alternative Methods for the Allocation of Legal Costs, 11 J. Legal Stud. 55 (1982).
100. Shen, Bernard T., Comment, From Jail Cell to Cellular Communication: Should the Rufo Standard Be Applied to Antitrust and Commercial Consent Decrees?, 90 Nw. U. L. Rev. 1781 (1996).
101. Shurtleff, Mark L., Am I Not A Man? The Dred Scott Story (2009).
102. Siegel, Reva B., Text in Contest: Gender and the Constitution from a Social Movement Perspective, 150 U. Pa. L. Rev. 297 (2001).
103. Siegelman, Peter & John J. Donohue III, The Selection of Employment Discrimination Disputes for Litigation: Using Business Cycle Effects To Test the Priest-Klein Hypothesis, 24 J. Legal Stud. 427 (1995).
104. Simon, William H., Solving Problems vs. Claiming Rights: The Pragmatist Challenge to Legal Liberalism, 46 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 127 (2004).
105. Somin, Ilya, The Limits of Backlash: Assessing the Political Response to Kelo, 93 Minn. L. Rev. 2100 (2009).
106. Spelman, Elizabeth V., Inessential Woman: Problems of Exclusion in Feminist Thought (1988).
107. Spier, Kathryn E., The Dynamics of Pretrial Negotiation, 59 Rev. Econ. Stud. 93 (1992).
108. Sprigman, Chris, The Mouse That Ate the Public Domain: Disney, the Copyright Term Extension Act, and Eldred v. Ashcroft, Findlaw's Writ (Mar. 5, 2002), http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20020305_sprigman.html.
109. Stone, Geoffrey R., et al., Constitutional Law (6th ed. 2009).
110. Supreme Court's Kelo Decision and Potential Congressional Responses: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on the Constitution of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 109th Cong. (2006).
111. Sunstein, Cass R., One Case at a Time: Judicial Minimalism on the Supreme Court (1999).
112. Sunstein, Cass R., The Supreme Court, 1995 Term-Foreword: Leaving Things Undecided, 110 Harv. L. Rev. 4 (1996).
113. Sunstein, Cass R., Three Civil Rights Fallacies, 79 Calif. L. Rev. 751 (1991).
114. Swidler, Ann, Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies, 51 Am. Soc. Rev. 273 (1986).
115. Thaler, Richard, Toward a Positive Theory of Consumer Choice, 1 J. Econ. Behav. & Org. 39 (1980).
116. Tsesis, Alexander, We Shall Overcome: A History of Civil Rights and the Law (2008).
117. Waldfogel, Joel, The Selection Hypothesis and the Relationship Between Trial and Plaintiff Victory, 103 J. Pol. Econ. 229 (1995).
118. Wittman, Donald, Is the Selection of Cases for Trial Biased?, 14 J. Legal Stud. 185 (1985).
119. Yardley William, Eminent Domain Project at Standstill Despite Ruling, N.Y. Times, Nov. 21, 2005, at A1.