Procedure, Responsibility, and Institutional Design

I write occasionally about civil procedure and institutional design, not as an academic exercise, but because the same structural failures that distort litigation outcomes also distort governance, regulation, and public trust.

My scholarship focuses on how institutions make decisions under conditions of information overload — and how responsibility, legitimacy, and judgment break down when systems can no longer determine what happened with sufficient clarity to justify coercive outcomes.

The Causes of Epistemic Failure in the Administration of Justice: Reconstructing Civil Procedure for a Data-Saturated World (Dec. 2025 Working Manuscript)

This Article diagnoses an epistemic crisis in modern civil procedure: the collapse of fact development under conditions of data saturation. Drawing on Roscoe Pound’s procedural realism, it argues that discovery has inverted from a truth-seeking mechanism into a form of economic coercion, and proposes a framework (“FRCP 2.0”) for restoring responsible, human judgment through computational assistance without automated adjudication.