Litigation and Inequality explores the dynamic and intricate relationship between legal and social change through the prism of litigation tactics and out-of-court settlement practices from the 1870s to the 1950s. Developing the synthetic historical concept of a "social litigation system", Purcell analyzes the role of both substansive and procedural law, as well as the impact of social and political factors in shaping the de facto processes of litigation and claims-disputing. Focusing on tort and insurance contract disputes between individuals and national corporations, he examines the changing social and economic significance of the choice between state and national courts that federal diversity jurisdiction gave litigants. Litigation and Inequality scrutinizes the increasingly sophisticated methods that parties developed to exploit their ability to choose between forums. It also traces the changing responses of the courts and legislatures to the escalation of tactical maneuvering. It locates the origins of modern litigation practice in the quarter century after 1910. Purcell points to fundamental flaws in the "efficiency" theory of tort law of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. He identifies specific ways in which the legal system regularly subsidized corporate enterprise. He seriously qualifies and refines the progressive charge that the federal courts favored business interests. The book argues that during the period from the turn of the century to World War I - especially the critical period from 1905 to 1908 - the Supreme Court reoriented the federal judicial system and essentially created the twentieth century federal judiciary. It also challenges the idea thatdiversity jurisdiction is best understood as a device to protect nonresidents from local prejudice. It illuminates a range of related historical and legal issues, from the ostensible "formalism" of the late nineteenth century judicial thinking to the origins of the workmen's compensation movement. Examining these developments with clarity and insight, this work will interest historians and sociologists, as well as lawyers and legal scholars.

Clinical neuropsychologists frequently evaluate individuals within a forensic context, and therefore must address questions regarding the possible presence of reduced effort, response bias and/or malingering. This volume offers a wide range of instructive real-world case examples involving the complex differential diagnosis where symptom exaggeration and/or malingering cloud the picture. Written by expert forensic neuropsychologists, the scenarios described provide informed, empirically-based and scientifically-derived opinions on the topic. Issues related to malingering, such as response bias and insufficient effort, are discussed thoroughly with regard to a large number of clinical conditions and assessment instruments. Test data and non-test information are considered and integrated by the numerous experts. Expert guidance for clinicians who must address the issue of malingering is provided in a straightforward and well-organized format. To date, there has not been a comparable collection of rich case material relevant to forensic practice in clinical neuropsychology.

Includes decisions of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1902-1934, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, 1934-1959, and various other courts of the District of Columbia.