News & Updates

At the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules’ meeting last week in Portland, Oregon, the Committee voted to adopt the Duke Conference “package” of amendments, as well as a last minute revised and streamlined Rule 37(e). The Committee considered and approved for adoption the package of amendments as laid out in the Agenda Book for the meeting.

The Agenda Book for the upcoming meeting of the federal Advisory Committee on Civil Rules (April 10-11, 2014) is now available online. The Agenda Book includes reports from the Duke and Discovery Subcommittees, along with the Subcommittees' current proposed rule amendments and Committee Notes, taking into account the public hearing testimony and over 2000 comments submitted during the public comment period.

Access to justice is by no means a new conversation in the United States, but it has been a frequent topic of conversation over the last few months. The issue took to the international stage last Thursday and Friday when the United Nations Human Rights Committee asked the U.S. to account for its growing civil justice gap, with two worrisome trends dominating the discussion.

In a recent post on the long-awaited results from pilot project experimentation around the country, we shared evaluations from the New Hampshire and Boston Litigation Session pilot projects. Initial data is now available from Utah as well, where significant rule changes were implemented in 2011, including comprehensive initial disclosures, a requirement that discovery be proportional, and tiered discovery based on amount in controversy.

The Conference of Chief Justices has established a new committee that will evaluate civil justice improvement efforts around the country and develop guidelines and best practices for civil litigation, as well as case-flow management. The National Center for State Courts has also undertaken a research project to inform the committee's work. IAALS looks forward to working alongside NCSC to support the efforts of the committee.

For those who have been awaiting empirical analysis from the pilot project and rules reform experimentation that has been going on around the country, there are two new significant reports from the earliest of the projects—from New Hampshire and Massachusetts. Both reports provide helpful insights into state pilot project efforts to address the increasing burden and cost of civil pretrial discovery.

The last of three hearings on the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is being held today in Dallas, Texas, and our Executive Director, Rebecca Love Kourlis, is among those testifying. IAALS has submitted a Joint Comment with the ACTL Task Force on Discovery and Civil Justice, as well as a Report coming out of our Forum for Understanding and Comment on the Federal Rule Amendments.

Rebecca Love Kourlis recently joined in a discussion about the proposed federal rule amendments, as published by the Washington Legal Foundation in their “Conversations With . . .” series. The discussion focused on the state of civil litigation in America, the federal discovery reform efforts, the proposed Federal Rule of Civil Procedure changes, and what else is needed to improve the discovery process.

The Iowa Supreme Court has requested comments on proposed amendments to the discovery provisions in the Iowa Rules of Civil Procedure and a proposed new rule allowing for streamlined and expedited civil actions. The proposed amendments and new rule stem from a concern regarding the declining number of civil jury trials in Iowa courts, of which there were only 204 tried to verdict in 2012.

We previously shared Judge Paul W. Grimm’s standard Discovery Order, which we recommend to state and federal court judges alike as a model and inspiration to manage the pretrial discovery process. Judge Grimm has made some revisions to his Order, including expanding the definition of proportionality and making reference to the possible use of Technology Assisted Review as a means to keep costs down. Download his new Order here.

Recently, the Civil Rules Advisory Committee held the first of three hearings on the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In an effort to provide input and offer comments with a fresh perspective, IAALS is hosting A Forum for Understanding and Comment on the Proposed Federal Rules Amendments in Denver, Colorado on December 5-6, 2013 for a small group of stakeholders from around the country.

As the public comment period continues on the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Senate Judiciary Committee joined in the discussion this week by holding a hearing on the proposals. The hearing provided another opportunity for comment on the proposed rules and their potential impact. There was a consistent message from the hearing that empirical research plays an important role in our analysis of these issues.

Many jurisdictions around the country have implemented alternative processes that are designed to provide litigants with speedy and less expensive access to civil trials. These programs generally involve a simplified pretrial process and a shortened trial on an expedited basis. This new resource offers a summary chart of the various programs nationwide and specific details for each.

As many have recognized, electronic discovery has arrived in the state courts. While there are abundant resources available on the topic of e-discovery, for many judges the question is, “Where to begin?” To answer that question, IAALS now offers this new toolkit for state court judges, which pulls together some of the best resources available. Whether you are an expert or a novice with e-discovery issues, this collection of resources will be useful in your cases.

Judge Paul W. Grimm is well known for his contributions in the area of improving the pretrial discovery process, particularly with regard to the discovery of electronically stored information. Judge Grimm’s Discovery Order provides an excellent model for facilitating judicial management, and we recommend it to state and federal court judges alike as a model and inspiration to manage the pretrial discovery process so as to reduce the cost and burden of discovery.

On August 15, 2013, the public comment period opened on the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This package of amendments represents the culmination of several years of work on the part of the Civil Rules Advisory Committee, with the end goal of streamlining the pre-trial process, and particularly discovery, so as to achieve a “just, speedy, and inexpensive” process. The public comment period will run through February 15, 2014.

The Seventh Circuit Electronic Discovery Pilot Program Committee, which for many years has been at the forefront of efforts to reduce the cost and burden of electronic discovery consistent with the goals of Rule 1, now provides another important resource for practitioners and judges everywhere. The Committee, which is currently engaged in Phase 3 of the Pilot Program, has developed a Model Discovery Plan and Case Management Order (CMO) relating to privileged documents.

Federal judges in the Southern District of New York are currently evaluating a pilot project, known as the SDNY Pilot § 1983 Plan, that defines how cases alleging false arrest, excessive force, or malicious prosecution are handled against the NYPD. While the project was instituted to address concerns regarding the increasing number of § 1983 cases being filed, and the increasing length of time to bring those cases to disposition, the Court’s request for feedback has resulted in a critical response by the plaintiffs’ bar.

The Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure this week approved a package of amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for publication and public comment. The proposed amendments to Rules 1, 4, 16, 26, 30, 31, 33, 34, 36, and 37 form a “package” of proposed rule changes that represent the culmination of several years of work on the part of the Civil Rules Advisory Committee.

In our recent publication in the Kansas Law Review, “The American Civil Justice System: From Recommendations to Reform in the 21st Century,” we explore the national momentum that has arisen around reducing the costs and delays associated with civil litigation. In this article we explore the history of recent efforts, and we note the important empirical research over the last five years that has laid the groundwork for understanding what is working, and what is not, in the civil justice system.