Talk:Civil procedure

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

First paragraph is really about US civil procedure. To show how silly it could get if made POV, I have added England and Wales items. I would welcome some idea as to how to proceed with this. Not everywhere is the US and its wikipedia policy to reflect this. It would be nice if the legal articles weren't so POV, but I can't see how to avoid it without US articles being separated out and a shorter much more general article being put in their stead. Francis Davey 13:50, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't know what POV is, but if I understand the problem, I think it could be solved in part by simply adding "In the United States" to the beginning of the article.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.246.127.192 (talk • contribs).

• POV ("point of view") means that it lacks a global point of view; for example, this article is centered on the American system of civil procedure, while the article on default judgment is exclusively English and Welsh in orientation. It would be nice to compare not only the British and American systems but also the Scottish, Canadian, Australian, and several not based on the English common system. Limiting it to one or two systems with a common heritage adds to the systemic bias that should be reduced as much as possible. 147.70.242.40 00:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Where's the Res Judicata

The concepts of issue preclusion and claim preclusion are big civpro topics. John wesley 19:39, 26 April 2006 (UTC)