News & Updates

A 93% satisfaction measure is not something you see every day. And, it is even more unusual in circumstances where people reporting such a high percentage account for both winners and losers, which is exactly why Chief Justice Matthew B. Durrant focused on this measure during his 2014 Utah State of the Judiciary Address. Chief Justice Durrants's explanation for the measure can be summed up in two words: procedural fairness.

In 2010, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania established an E-Discovery Special Masters Pilot Program with the goal of developing an approved list of special masters to assist with monitoring electronic discovery compliance, narrowing and facilitating resolution of e-discovery disputes, and providing reports and recommendations to the judge, as necessary. A recent article from Law Technology News highlights the successes of the program.

Law Week Colorado recently published an article covering IAALS’ preliminary report on the Colorado Civil Access Pilot Project (CAPP). On April 7, IAALS published its first findings on the project from collected docket and survey data. The Law Week article features interviews with IAALS Executive Director and former Colorado Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Love Kourlis and IAALS Director of Research Corina Gerety.

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 issue of social media and juries is not a new one, but a recent study sought to identify ways courts can minimize juror-use of social media and better protect the long-standing institution of a fair and impartial jury. The study surveyed hundreds of jurors to determine whether they felt tempted to use social media during the trial and deliberation process. Based upon feedback, the authors have specific courtroom recommendations for judges.

IAALS is pleased to announce the completion of its preliminary evaluation report on the Colorado Civil Access Pilot Project (CAPP), which tests a new set of pre-trial procedures for business actions in state district court. Our initial analysis reveals that the CAPP process as a whole has succeeded in achieving many of its intended effects, including a reduced time to disposition, increased court interaction, proportional discovery and costs, and a lower level of motions practice.

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 article, Law Week Colorado covered IAALS' newest publication, Working Smarter, Not Harder: How Excellent Judges Manage Cases. The article features interviews with IAALS Executive Director and former Colorado Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Love Kourlis and 4th Judicial District Judge David Prince, one of the judges who was featured in Working Smarter.

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.

IAALS, in conjunction with the ACTL, has released a new report that highlights key civil case management techniques for judges that have the potential to streamline litigation in their courtrooms. Working Smarter, Not Harder: How Excellent Judges Manage Cases documents the recommendations and key practices of nearly 30 state and federal trial court judges, who were identified as being outstanding and efficient case managers.

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.

Jurors have a unique perspective on our legal system. Recently, I had the opportunity to speak with someone who served on a jury this fall in California Superior Court. He had some suggestions as to how things could have been handled differently. We at IAALS hope judges and attorneys are listening. These techniques are already in use in many courtrooms across the country—but not all.

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.