Abstract
In this Essay, I explain both the nineteenth and twentieth century decisions to adopt transsubstantive procedure, borrowing from equity as the model. I then discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the transsubstantive/equity decision, and why, on balance, I think the combined decision needs readjustment. I end with suggestions for change, including a simpler procedural track for some cases and non-binding protocols for discovery and other procedural incidents for some of the more expansive and expensive case-types.
Disciplines
Law
Publisher
University of Denver Sturm College of Law
Publication Date
2010
Permanent URL
http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d20002470
Recommended Citation
Denver University Law Review, Vol. 87, No. 2, pp. 377-406, 2010.
Notes
Originally published in Denver University Law Review, Vol. 87, No. 2, pp. 377-406, 2010.