{"id":250,"date":"2015-01-07T14:29:50","date_gmt":"2015-01-07T19:29:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/?p=250"},"modified":"2016-07-28T11:17:31","modified_gmt":"2016-07-28T15:17:31","slug":"litigation-isolationism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/","title":{"rendered":"Litigation Isolationism"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Over the past two decades, U.S. courts have pursued a studied avoidance of transnational litigation. The resulting litigation isolationism appears to be driven by courts\u2019 desire to promote separation of powers, international comity, and the interests of defendants. This Article demonstrates, however, that this new kind of \u201cavoidance\u201d in fact frequently undermines not only these values but other significant U.S. interests as well by continuing to interfere with foreign relations and driving plaintiffs to sue in foreign courts.<\/p>\n<p>This Article offers four contributions: First, it focuses the conversation about transnational litigation on those doctrines designed to avoid it, i.e., doctrines that permit or require courts to dismiss a case based on its \u201cforeignness.\u201d Doing so helps to identify the particular concerns justifying this kind of avoidance and to evaluate them on their own terms. Second, the Article presents evidence of emerging foreign trends that increasingly (and surprisingly) permit traditionally American, plaintiff-friendly procedures, including higher damages awards, aggregate litigation, and third-party litigation financing. Third, the Article demonstrates that, particularly in light of these foreign trends, avoidance has failed to achieve its stated goals, and in many instances has undermined them. Finally, the Article suggests ways to refine avoidance doctrines to address these unintended consequences. Its more basic and urgent task, however, is to identify the growing phenomenon of litigation isolationism, highlight its perversities, and caution against its further expansion. <a href=\"http:\/\/papers.ssrn.com\/sol3\/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2546351\" target=\"_blank\">Download the paper<\/a> at SSRN.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Over the past two decades, U.S. courts have pursued a studied avoidance of transnational litigation. The resulting litigation isolationism appears to be driven by courts\u2019 desire to promote separation of powers, international comity, and the interests of defendants. This Article demonstrates, however, that this new kind of \u201cavoidance\u201d in fact frequently undermines not only these values but other significant U.S. interests as well by continuing to interfere with foreign relations and driving plaintiffs to sue in foreign courts. This Article offers four contributions: First, it focuses the conversation about transnational litigation on those doctrines designed to avoid it, i.e., doctrines that permit or require courts to dismiss a case based on its \u201cforeignness.\u201d Doing so helps to identify the particular concerns justifying this kind of avoidance and to evaluate them on their own terms. Second, the Article presents evidence of emerging foreign trends that increasingly (and surprisingly) permit traditionally American, plaintiff-friendly procedures, including higher damages awards, aggregate litigation, and third-party litigation financing. Third, the Article demonstrates that, particularly in light of these foreign trends, avoidance &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":251,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"audience":[],"coauthors":[28],"class_list":["post-250","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-faculty-scholarship"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\r\n<title>Litigation Isolationism - Voices at Temple<\/title>\r\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\r\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Litigation Isolationism - Voices at Temple\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Over the past two decades, U.S. courts have pursued a studied avoidance of transnational litigation. The resulting litigation isolationism appears to be driven by courts\u2019 desire to promote separation of powers, international comity, and the interests of defendants. This Article demonstrates, however, that this new kind of \u201cavoidance\u201d in fact frequently undermines not only these values but other significant U.S. interests as well by continuing to interfere with foreign relations and driving plaintiffs to sue in foreign courts. This Article offers four contributions: First, it focuses the conversation about transnational litigation on those doctrines designed to avoid it, i.e., doctrines that permit or require courts to dismiss a case based on its \u201cforeignness.\u201d Doing so helps to identify the particular concerns justifying this kind of avoidance and to evaluate them on their own terms. Second, the Article presents evidence of emerging foreign trends that increasingly (and surprisingly) permit traditionally American, plaintiff-friendly procedures, including higher damages awards, aggregate litigation, and third-party litigation financing. Third, the Article demonstrates that, particularly in light of these foreign trends, avoidance &hellip;\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Voices at Temple\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2015-01-07T19:29:50+00:00\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-28T15:17:31+00:00\" \/>\r\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Bookman-LitigationIsolation-January2015.png\" \/>\r\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"840\" \/>\r\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"560\" \/>\r\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\r\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Pamela K. Bookman\" \/>\r\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\r\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Pamela K. Bookman\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\r\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/litigation-isolationism\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/litigation-isolationism\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Beckie Schatschneider\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/505b7875ef49205bf81379b92d47f94e\"},\"headline\":\"Litigation Isolationism\",\"datePublished\":\"2015-01-07T19:29:50+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-28T15:17:31+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/litigation-isolationism\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":238,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/litigation-isolationism\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/cms\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2015\\\/08\\\/Bookman-LitigationIsolation-January2015.png\",\"articleSection\":[\"Faculty Scholarship\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/litigation-isolationism\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/litigation-isolationism\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/litigation-isolationism\\\/\",\"name\":\"Litigation Isolationism - Voices at Temple\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/litigation-isolationism\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/litigation-isolationism\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/cms\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2015\\\/08\\\/Bookman-LitigationIsolation-January2015.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2015-01-07T19:29:50+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-28T15:17:31+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/505b7875ef49205bf81379b92d47f94e\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/litigation-isolationism\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/litigation-isolationism\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/litigation-isolationism\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/cms\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2015\\\/08\\\/Bookman-LitigationIsolation-January2015.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/cms\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2015\\\/08\\\/Bookman-LitigationIsolation-January2015.png\",\"width\":840,\"height\":560,\"caption\":\"Law student litigating\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/litigation-isolationism\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Litigation Isolationism\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/\",\"name\":\"Voices at Temple\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/505b7875ef49205bf81379b92d47f94e\",\"name\":\"Beckie Schatschneider\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/62b6c5fa1068c42262dab498d74cb3fc60fbba8344047dc13348bd3aacf7b70a?s=96&d=mm&r=g9dc77189f33a293d2c82a50cd24ebb9f\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/62b6c5fa1068c42262dab498d74cb3fc60fbba8344047dc13348bd3aacf7b70a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/62b6c5fa1068c42262dab498d74cb3fc60fbba8344047dc13348bd3aacf7b70a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Beckie Schatschneider\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www2.law.temple.edu\\\/voices\\\/author\\\/rschatsc\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\r\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Litigation Isolationism - Voices at Temple","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Litigation Isolationism - Voices at Temple","og_description":"Over the past two decades, U.S. courts have pursued a studied avoidance of transnational litigation. The resulting litigation isolationism appears to be driven by courts\u2019 desire to promote separation of powers, international comity, and the interests of defendants. This Article demonstrates, however, that this new kind of \u201cavoidance\u201d in fact frequently undermines not only these values but other significant U.S. interests as well by continuing to interfere with foreign relations and driving plaintiffs to sue in foreign courts. This Article offers four contributions: First, it focuses the conversation about transnational litigation on those doctrines designed to avoid it, i.e., doctrines that permit or require courts to dismiss a case based on its \u201cforeignness.\u201d Doing so helps to identify the particular concerns justifying this kind of avoidance and to evaluate them on their own terms. Second, the Article presents evidence of emerging foreign trends that increasingly (and surprisingly) permit traditionally American, plaintiff-friendly procedures, including higher damages awards, aggregate litigation, and third-party litigation financing. Third, the Article demonstrates that, particularly in light of these foreign trends, avoidance &hellip;","og_url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/","og_site_name":"Voices at Temple","article_published_time":"2015-01-07T19:29:50+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-28T15:17:31+00:00","og_image":[{"width":840,"height":560,"url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Bookman-LitigationIsolation-January2015.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Pamela K. Bookman","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Pamela K. Bookman","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/"},"author":{"name":"Beckie Schatschneider","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/#\/schema\/person\/505b7875ef49205bf81379b92d47f94e"},"headline":"Litigation Isolationism","datePublished":"2015-01-07T19:29:50+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-28T15:17:31+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/"},"wordCount":238,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Bookman-LitigationIsolation-January2015.png","articleSection":["Faculty Scholarship"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/","url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/","name":"Litigation Isolationism - Voices at Temple","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Bookman-LitigationIsolation-January2015.png","datePublished":"2015-01-07T19:29:50+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-28T15:17:31+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/#\/schema\/person\/505b7875ef49205bf81379b92d47f94e"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Bookman-LitigationIsolation-January2015.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Bookman-LitigationIsolation-January2015.png","width":840,"height":560,"caption":"Law student litigating"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/litigation-isolationism\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Litigation Isolationism"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/","name":"Voices at Temple","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/#\/schema\/person\/505b7875ef49205bf81379b92d47f94e","name":"Beckie Schatschneider","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/62b6c5fa1068c42262dab498d74cb3fc60fbba8344047dc13348bd3aacf7b70a?s=96&d=mm&r=g9dc77189f33a293d2c82a50cd24ebb9f","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/62b6c5fa1068c42262dab498d74cb3fc60fbba8344047dc13348bd3aacf7b70a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/62b6c5fa1068c42262dab498d74cb3fc60fbba8344047dc13348bd3aacf7b70a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Beckie Schatschneider"},"url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/author\/rschatsc\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Bookman-LitigationIsolation-January2015.png","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/250","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=250"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/250\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":252,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/250\/revisions\/252"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/251"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=250"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=250"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=250"},{"taxonomy":"audience","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/audience?post=250"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www2.law.temple.edu\/voices\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=250"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}