Discover the latest in the most recent issue of Counselor, the alumni magazine.
Read the latest issue of Updates.
05/07/2007 - Suja Thomas, Professor of Law, was featured in the April 30, 2007 issue of the New York Times column by Adam Liptak.
Here's an excerpt from Liptak's column "Cases Keep Flowing In, But the Jury Pool Is Idle"
"In an article titled "Why Summary Judgment Is Unconstitutional," published last month in the Virginia Law Review, Suja A. Thomas, a law professor at the University of Cincinnati, makes the perfectly plausible argument that the procedure violates the Seventh Amendment, which reserves the job of determining the facts in civil cases to juries.
When judges decide summary judgment motions, Professor Thomas wrote, they intrude on that job. The theory of summary judgment is that judges may rule for one side or the other only after finding that no "genuine" issues of "material" fact are in dispute. They must determine, as the Supreme Court has put it, whether "a reasonable jury could return a verdict" for the party defending against a motion for summary judgment.
All of that pushes judges right up to and sometimes across the constitutional line of determining the facts for themselves."
Contact Information:
Sherry English
513.556.0090
sherry.english@uc.edu
