授業の目的 【日本語】
Goals of the Course(JPN) | | (This course is taught in English)
This course will cover selected topics in common law and Federal civil procedure in the United States, including: (1) subject matter jurisdiction of the Federal courts; (2) personal jurisdiction in US courts; (3) applicable law in Article III diversity actions; (4) discovery procedures and scope of discovery; (5) class actions; (6) legal framework of product liability; (7) remedies and scope of relief; (8) the impact of civil juries. |
|
|
授業の目的 【英語】
Goals of the Course | | | This course will cover selected topics in common law and Federal civil procedure in the United States, including: (1) subject matter jurisdiction of the Federal courts; (2) personal jurisdiction in US courts; (3) applicable law in Article III diversity actions; (4) discovery procedures and scope of discovery; (5) class actions; (6) legal framework of product liability; (7) remedies and scope of relief; (8) the impact of civil juries. |
|
|
到達目標 【日本語】
Objectives of the Course(JPN) | | (This course is taught in English)
Students who complete the course will have an awareness of a limited subset of issues relevant to activity in the U.S. |
|
|
到達目標 【英語】
Objectives of the Course | | | Students who complete the course will have an awareness of a limited subset of issues relevant to activity in the U.S. |
|
|
授業の内容や構成
Course Content / Plan | | 1 Introduction Purpose of the course; format of sessions; arrangement of materials; survey of topics to be covered. Case reading. Prepare Palsgraf.
2 Negligence,causation, scope of duty 1. Palsgraf v. Long Island Railway, 248 N.Y. 339 (1928).
Case reading. Prepare Donoghue and Escola.
3 Negligence, warranty, & product liability (1) 1. Donoghue v. Stevenson, 1932 SC 31 (House of Lords).
2. Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co., 24 Cal. 2d 453 (Supreme Court 1944).
Case reading. Prepare McPherson and Unimac.
4 Negligence, warranty, & product liability (2) 1. Mcpherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 NY 382 (1916).
2. Rogers v. Unimac Co., 115 Ariz. 115 (1977).
Case reading. Prepare International Shoe.
5 Federal vs state jurisdiction; personal versus subejct matter jurisdiction 1. International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 US 310 (Supreme Court 1945).
Case reading. Prepare WW Volkswagen and Asahi.
6 Diversity jurisdiction, minimum contacts 1. World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 US 286 (Supreme Court 1980).
2. Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty., 480 US 102 (Supreme Court 1987).
Case reading. Prepare Erie and Hanna.
7 Applicable law 1. Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 US 64 (Supreme Court 1938).
2. Hanna v. Plumer, 380 US 460 (Supreme Court 1965).
Case reading. Prepare Amaya and Dillon.
8 Scope of duty and "emotional shock" (1) 1. Amaya v. Home Ice, Fuel & Supply Co., 379 P. 2d 513 (Supreme Court 1963).
2. Dillon v. Legg, 68 Cal. 2d 728 (Supreme Court 1968).
Case reading. Prepare selected portions of Alcock and White.
9 Scope of duty and "emotional shock" (2) 1. Alcock and others v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police, 1 AC 310 (1992).
2. White and others v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police and others, 2 AC 455 (1999).
Case reading. Prepare Amchem.
10 Class actions (1) 1. Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor, 521 US 591 (Supreme Court 1997).
Case reading. Prepare cases with particular attention ot Shady Grove and Szabo.
11 Class actions (2) 1. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Dabit, 547 US 71 (Supreme Court 2006).
2. Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Ins., 130 S. Ct. 1431 (Supreme Court 2010).
3. Szabo v. Bridgeport Machines, Inc., 249 F. 3d 672 (Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit 2001).
Case reading.Prepare Blonder-Tongue, Parkland and Sturgell. Prepare Parklane.
12 Res Judicata
2. Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore, 439 US 322 (Supreme Court 1979).
Case reading.
Prepare Blonder-Tongue and Taylor.
13 State and Federal proceedings
1. Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Ill. Foundation, 402 US 313 (Supreme Court 1971).
2. Taylor v. Sturgell, 128 S. Ct. 2161 (Supreme Court 2008).
Case reading. Prepare Younger.
14 State and Federal proceedings 1. Younger v. Harris, 401 US 37 (Supreme Court 1971). Case reading.
15 Review session
Composite problems crossing the issues and rules reviewed during the course. |
|
|
履修条件・関連する科目
Course Prerequisites and Related Courses | | | English ability sufficient to read and discuss court judgments written in English is required. |
|
|
成績評価の方法と基準
Course Evaluation Method and Criteria | | | Appraisal will be based on participation and a final examination. Participation will count toward 40%, and the final examination 60% of the final mark. (If student numbers are limited, the final grade will be based on preparation and understanding demonstrated in class discussions.) |
|
|
教科書・テキスト
Textbook | | | Cases to be read will be distributed via the CMS. |
|
|
参考書
Reference Book | | | Further materials may be provided as required. |
|
|
課外学習等（授業時間外学習の指示）
Study Load(Self-directed Learning Outside Course Hours) | | | Students are expected to come to class prepared to discuss the material of the day. |
|
|
注意事項
Notice for Students | | |
|
授業開講形態等
Lecture format, etc. | |
授業開講形態（対面遠隔併用で実施する授業一覧）は、名古屋大学法科大学院ホームページの「News」に掲載します。URL：https://www.law.nagoya-u.ac.jp/ls/
※履修登録後に授業形態等に変更がある場合には、TKCシステム又はNUCTの授業サイトで案内します。 |
|
|
遠隔授業（オンデマンド型）で行う場合の追加措置
Additional measures for remote class (on-demand class) | |
遠隔授業はTKCシステム又はNUCTで行う。教員への質問方法、学生同士の意見交換の方法は次のとおりとする。なお、教員より別の指示がある場合は、その指示に従うこと。
・教員への質問は、TKCシステム又はNUCT機能「メッセージ」により行うこと。
・授業に関する受講学生間の意見交換は、TKCシステム又はNUCT機能「メッセージ」により行うこと。
（※担当教員がNUCTの「フォーラム」機能を追加設定した場合は「フォーラム」も利用可。） |
|
|