The federal government and the states each play an important role in addressing the problem of lawsuit abuse. While for the past several years most legal reform activity has occurred at the state level, with states enacting several effective, high-profile reforms, many important legal reforms have also been enacted and implemented at the federal level. With the changing political landscape, an increase in legal reform action at the federal level can be expected.
Congress is currently considering a number of important legal reform proposals that would help restore balance to America's civil justice system. These include asbestos litigation reform, mandatory sanctions for filling frivolous litigation, protecting innocent parties from being unfairly or fradulently joines into a lawsuit, class action and multi-district litigation reforms, increased certainty where the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) is concerned, and reform of over-broad laws that threaten individuals and business with criminal prosecution absent any criminal intent, among others.
In addition to these proactive legal reform efforts, there is a need to defend against efforts by the plaintiffs’ bar to expand liability in Congress, federal courts, and regulatory agencies.
This paper documents compelling examples of over-enforcement abuses, and offers details of the wide-ranging and interrelated ways government enforcement actions impact American businesses. Read More
This report analyzes asbestos bankruptcy trust claims forms from the recent Garlock bankruptcy to address patterns of inconsistent and fraudulent claiming from one trust to another. Read More
The Food Court: Trends in Food and Beverage Class Action Litigation
Covering the Contractors: The Current State of the Government Contractor Defense
Enforcement Gone Amok: The Many Faces of Over-Enforcement in the United States
DOJ’S New Threshold for “Cooperation”: Challenges Posed by the Yates Memo and USAM Revisions
Insights & Inconsistencies: Lessons from the Garlock Trust Claims
The Waiting Game: Delay and Non-Disclosure of Asbestos Trust Claims
Constitutional Constraints: Provisions Limiting Excessive Government Fines
The Trial Lawyer Underground: Covertly Lobbying the Executive Branch
Enforcement Slush Funds: Funding Federal and State Agencies with Enforcement Proceeds
The FIRREA Revival: Dredging Up Solutions to the Financial Crisis
Unprincipled Prosecution: Abuse of Power and Profiteering in the New 'Litigation Swarm'
A Roadmap for Reform: Lessons from Eight Years of the Class Action Reform Act
Fixing the False Claims Act: The Case for Compliance-Focused Reforms
Federalism, The Framers, and Federal Legal Reform: Setting the Record Straight
"8 Key Elements Of An Effective Antitrust Compliance Program"; Missouri Lawmaker Says Legislature Will Continue Legal Reform Momentum Next Session... Read More
A new report released by three law professors found that plaintiffs' attorneys in securities class actions may be incentivized to inflate their billable hours to justify large fee awards, Law360 reports.... Read More
New York Federal Judge Tossed FCA Suit Challenged By DOJ... Read More
EU Data Privacy Fines Are Getting Steep. Will This Be the New Normal?... Read More
In episode three of Cause for Action, the U.S Chamber Institute for Legal Reform's Chief Operating Officer Harold Kim and the Chamber Litigation Center's Senior Vice President and Chief Counsel Steve Lehotsky break down the significance of key Supreme Court decisions from the recently-ended term.... Read More
"Collective Investor Actions" On The Rise... Read More
"If you ain't first, you're last" wasn't just the catchphrase of Ricky Bobby, the fictional race car driver from Talladega Nights; until last week, it was also the policy of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division when it came to companies reporting antitrust violations. ... Read More
DOJ Revamps Antitrust Compliance Policy; Florida Legal Expert Says Insurance Rates Will Drop Now That AOB Law Is In Effect... Read More
A new research paper released by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform (ILR) found that "private rights of action are inefficient and ineffective," particularly when used to address data privacy concerns.... Read More
A new study released by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform (ILR) shows what happens when plaintiffs' lawyers are given the green light to enforce privacy laws through private rights of action: clogged courts, less innovation and no real benefit to consumers. ... Read More
