The Effects of Twombly and Iqbal
The Effects of Twombly and Iqbal
复制标题
托姆布雷和伊克巴尔的影响
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
William H. J. Hubbard
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
William H. J. Hubbard
自从托姆布雷和伊克巴尔引入了可诉性辩护原则以来，一个由法律的学者（包括我自己）组成的家庭手工业就开始研究托姆布雷和伊克巴尔对诉讼当事人和案件结果的影响。到目前为止，结果是模棱两可的，很难理解不同的方法和结果。在本文中，我开发了一个全面的框架，以实证检验托姆布雷和伊克巴尔对下级法院和诉讼当事人的影响，考虑到广泛的混杂因素和托姆布雷和伊克巴尔可能间接影响诉讼行为的多种方式。使用这个框架，我测试Twombly和伊克巴尔对地区法院和诉讼行为的影响，使用两个数据集-一个行政数据，一个案卷和投诉数据-其中每一个，当这个项目完成时，将是有史以来最大的数据库。我还回顾了现有的调查结果。根据初步分析，随着更多数据的收集，这些分析可能会进行修订，我发现几乎没有证据表明托姆布雷和伊克巴尔这两个50年来最重要的辩护案件对律师和法官在所有案件中的行为产生了重大影响。带有偏见的解雇率保持稳定，解雇动议仍然不常见，在托姆布雷和伊克巴尔之后，和解和归档模式没有明显变化。然而，有一些证据表明，书状的起草发生了变化，对原告本身产生了更大的影响。
Ever since Twombly and Iqbal introduced the doctrine of plausibility pleading, a cottage industry of legal scholars (including myself) has undertaken to detect the effects of Twombly and Iqbal on litigants and case outcomes. Results so far have been equivocal, and it has been hard to make sense of the disparate methodologies and findings. In this paper, I develop a comprehensive framework for empirically testing the effect of Twombly and Iqbal on lower courts and litigants, taking into account a wide range of confounding factors and the numerous ways in which Twombly and Iqbal may have indirectly affected litigant behavior. Using this framework, I test for effects of Twombly and Iqbal on district court and litigant behavior using two datasets — one of administrative data, one of docket and complaint data — each of which, when this project is complete, will be the largest database of its kind ever compiled. I also review existing findings. Based on preliminary analyses, which are subject to revision as additional data is gathered, I find virtually no evidence that Twombly and Iqbal, the two most important pleading cases in 50 years, have had a major effect on the behavior of lawyers and judges across all cases. Rates of dismissal with prejudice have held steady, motions to dismiss remain uncommon, and settlement and filing patterns have not changed appreciably in the wake of Twombly and Iqbal. There is, however, some evidence of changes in the drafting of pleadings and a greater effect on pro se plaintiffs.