News & Updates

The Conference of Chief Justices has recognized the important needs of litigants in our state courts, and has answered the call to action to improve our civil justice system by adopting the Recommendations of its Civil Justice Improvements Committee earlier this month. 

At IAALS’ Fourth Civil Justice Reform Summit, we brought together stakeholders to brainstorm a vision for the courts of tomorrow and steps to get there. Today we release the report from that summit, Creating the Just, Speedy, and Inexpensive Courts of Tomorrow: Ideas for Impact from IAALS’ Fourth Civil Justice Reform Summit.

This week, former New York Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman, was presented with the first-ever Mary C. McQueen Award for Excellence and Leadership in Justice System Improvement as part of the annual joint conference of the Conference of Chief Justices and Conference of State Court Administrators.

The National Center for State Courts’ 2016 Trends in State Courts includes an article focused on the impact that high-volume cases, such as consumer debt collection, landlord/tenant, and small claims, have on the overall civil caseload. Authored by…

IAALS’ Honoring Families Initiative recently released two new reports focused on the experiences of self-represented litigants in our family court system: Cases Without Counsel: Research on Experiences of Self-Representation in U.S. Family Court and Cases Without Counsel: Our Recommendations after Listening to the Litigants.

The federal rule amendments that went into effect on December 1, 2015, represent the culmination of years of effort dedicated to improving our civil justice system in the federal courts. While we recognize it took much hard work to get this far, to…

The use of social media by jurors is a growing problem. In response, California passed a state law in 2011 making violations punishable by contempt. Since then, such misconduct has only increased as jurors become even more technologically savvy and connected via smartphones.

Back in 2011, Utah implemented significant statewide changes to its rules of civil procedure governing disclosure and discovery, incorporating proportionality and presumptive discovery limits based on tiers. Once again Utah is on the leading edge, implementing a Civil Case Management Pilot Program that promotes increased judicial case management oversight.

On December 1, 2015, the long awaited amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure went into effect, including changes focused on cooperation, active judicial case management, proportionality in discovery, and preservation/sanctions. Proving…

Inspired in part by the work of the Conference of Chief Justice’s Civil Justice Improvements Committee, Chief Justice Scott Bales of the Arizona Supreme Court issued an Order at the end of last year establishing a new initiative for the Arizona Courts, creating a 24-member committee of judges, lawyers, and stakeholders to address ways in which civil litigation can be made more efficient and less expensive.

Last Thursday and Friday, February 25 and 26, IAALS hosted its Fourth Civil Justice Reform Summit, focused on creating the just, speedy, and inexpensive courts of tomorrow. The goal of the summit was to bring together stakeholders to chart the next steps for creating the just, speedy, and inexpensive courts of tomorrow.

At the beginning of this month, the long awaited amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure went into effect. Of the amendments, the one that changed the most following the public comment period was Rule 37(e), which was substantially revised…

An important takeaway from the May 2010 Conference on Civil Litigation held at Duke University Law School, sponsored by the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules, was that the disposition of civil actions in our federal courts could be improved by advancing early judicial case management. As a result, the package of amendments that grew out of the Duke Conference, and that went into effect on December 1 of this year, seek to promote sustained, active, hands-on judicial case management.

On December 1, Rule 1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure was amended to recognize that the rules should be construed, administered, “and employed by the court and the parties” to secure a just, speedy, and inexpensive determination in every case. This change is part of the long awaited amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and this blog is one in a series this month on the significant changes.

Just a week ago, the long awaited amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure went into effect. Of the amendments, the most significant—and controversial—changes are to Rule 26, which specifically incorporates proportionality into the scope of discovery.

Recently, IAALS Executive Director Rebecca Love Kourlis and I met with the other members and staff of the Conference of Chief Justices Civil Justice Improvements Committee for its fourth plenary meeting in Washington, D.C. The committee is evaluating civil justice improvement efforts around the country and developing guidelines and best practices for civil litigation, as well as caseflow management.

As the legal world is focused on the newly implemented amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which went into effect December 1st, there is one group that is already thinking “what next?”—the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules. At the…

Today, December 1, the long awaited amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure go into effect. The “package” of amendments include rule changes across a number of rules (specifically Rules 1, 4, 16, 26, 30, 31, 33, and 34) and focus on increasing cooperation, achieving proportionality in discovery, and encouraging early case management by judges.

We are excited to open registration for IAALS’ Fourth Civil Justice Reform Summit, which will be held in Denver, February 25-26, 2016. The Summit will feature nationally renowned faculty discussing the challenges of implementing change and engaging in a dialogue with participants regarding the necessary next steps for creating the just, speedy, and inexpensive courts of tomorrow.

The California State Bar recently issued a final opinion weighing in on the question of an attorney’s ethical duties in handling the discovery of electronically stored information. In its Formal Opinion No. 2015-193, the State Bar of California…