News & Updates

Alabama has passed legislation, SB 47 (Act 2012-492), which requires the Alabama Supreme Court to adopt expedited trial procedures for cases in circuit court where the amount in controversy does not exceed $50,000. In contrast, Louisiana also passed legislation, HCR 81, which requests the Louisiana State Law Institute study jury trial procedures and make recommendations for an expedited or summary jury trial program.

The Supreme Court of New Hampshire entered an order last week amending the Superior Court Proportional Discovery/Automatic Disclosure Pilot Project Rules to implement the PAD Pilot Rules in all counties beginning March 1, 2013.

The National Center for State Courts and the Harvard Kennedy School of Government recently published a paper, "Keeping Courts Funded: Recommendations on How Courts Can Avoid the Budget Axe", which offers a perspective on how state courts can more effectively argue for sufficient funding by approaching the budgetary process proactively, effectively, and humbly.

When state courts are strained or crippled by budget cuts—and it’s all too familiar a scenario around the country—how can we make the strongest case possible for adequate funding? At the National Center for State Courts and at Justice at Stake, we’ve compiled "Funding Justice: Strategies and Messages for Restoring Court Funding." It offers a comprehensive blueprint for legal groups and civic leaders to champion effectively the needs of America’s courts.

Approximately one year ago, on November 1, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York implemented a Pilot Project Regarding Case Management Techniques for Complex Civil Cases. The Board of Judges has now extended the pilot project for an additional eighteen months, to expire September 30, 2014.

The Sedona Conference® has updated its Resources for the Judiciary, a reference manual for judges that is “intended to assemble and promote a variety of proven judicial management tools to help parties develop and execute appropriate, cost-effective, cooperative discovery plans; avoid unnecessary discovery disputes; and resolve discovery disputes that may arise in a fair and expeditious manner.”

Meaningful access to justice is the most important issue confronting state courts across this country. There can be little doubt that we now have a state justice system in America that is slowly eroding while at the same time becoming increasingly too expensive for the vast majority of our fellow citizens. These developments, left unchecked, will have real consequences that will go to the very core of the American promise. They should concern us all.

Two recent events have us reflecting on the reasons why it is important to collect and share data. At IAALS, we have concluded our final study of Colorado’s Simplified Procedure (Rule 16.1), which was enacted in 2004. In Texas, the Supreme Court has newly adopted a Rule for Expedited Actions (Rule 169). Both rules intend to provide a shorter, less expensive process for smaller cases. They also have aspects similar to various short, summary, and expedited civil action programs in place around the country.

Recently, during the Conference of Chief Justices and the Conference of State Court Administrators, many state chief justices, court administrators, and legislators attended or participated in a panel discussion in Washington, D.C., sponsored by the National Center for State Courts. At this discussion, panelists addressed how courts should best handle the severe judiciary budget cuts impacting the nation's courts, especially in light of the public's increasing demand for court services.

The Northern District of California unveiled a new set of guidelines on Tuesday for the discovery of electronically stored information (ESI). The guidelines were developed by a bench-bar committee chaired by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. LaPorte in partnership with the Rules Committee. In addition to the guidelines, the court has also adopted an ESI checklist for use during the Rule 26(f) meet and confer process and a model stipulated order.

IAALS has just released a Rule One Initiative research report entitled Measuring Rule 16.1: Colorado’s Simplified Procedure Experiment. In 2004, the Colorado Supreme Court put in place Rule 16.1, a voluntary pretrial process for smaller dollar-volume civil cases, with the hope of providing a more efficient path to resolution. This new reports sets forth the results of an empirical study of Rule 16.1, including its role and impact.

A Metropolitan Corporate Counsel article this week asks "Are Courts Beginning to Take Proportionality Seriously in E-Discovery?" As this article points out, “the tide may be changing” with a "variety of recent developments [that] demonstrate that courts are relying on the principle of proportionality with increasing frequency and vigor when assessing the scope and limits of e-discovery."

The Texas Supreme Court has issued its long-awaited rules for expedited actions this week, making the process mandatory in cases of $100,000 or less. The rules are being adopted as a result of Texas legislation that called upon the Court to promulgate "rules to promote the prompt, efficient, and cost-effective resolution of civil actions."

Rebecca Love Kourlis, Executive Director of IAALS, will speak about the organization’s work to improve the use of financial experts in litigation on December 5. She will discuss how civil pretrial processes involving financial experts might be streamlined to increase the experts’ effectiveness and reduce client costs, which is the focus of a recently published report, Another Voice: Financial Experts on Reducing Client Costs in Litigation.

In a promised follow-up to his prior blog post on IAALS’ Third Civil Justice Reform Summit, Professor Jordan Singer of New England Law│Boston discusses the new set of civil rules in Utah, which were implemented a year ago today.

Recognizing that there is widespread concern that the civil justice system is too complex, costs too much, and takes too long, a new report provides recommendations for designing short, summary, and expedited (“SSE”) programs and calls for implementation of such programs on a national scale. The report, A Return to Trials: Implementing Effective Short, Summary, and Expedited Civil Action Programs, is co-authored by IAALS, ABOTA, and the NCSC.

Colorado litigants and their attorneys are no strangers to e-discovery and its challenges. During the month of October, attorneys practicing in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado have a unique opportunity to provide input on this important topic.

IAALS alum and panelist at IAALS’ Third Civil Justice Reform Summit Professor Jordan Singer, of New England Law│Boston, recently shared his reactions to the Summit at PrawfsBlawg. In addition to putting the Summit into context and providing a summary of the different state and federal pilot projects around the country, Professor Singer also urges courts and researchers to share raw data on reform efforts.

In their September issue, Law Week Colorado discusses the problems with the current civil justice system and the on-going efforts by states to facilitate “just, speedy and inexpensive” litigation. Referencing dialogue from IAALS’ Third Civil Justice Reform Summit, the article describes the states' implementation of civil procedure pilot projects, intended to improve state systems by limiting discovery proportionally to what is needed.

Dean John T. Broderick, Jr., is the Dean of the University of New Hampshire School of Law. Previously, he was Chief Justice of the New Hampshire Supreme Court since 2004. Prior to his installation as Chief Justice, he had served as an Associate Justice since 1995. As we launch IAALS Online, he joins three other former Chief Justices in the conversation about IAALS and its initiatives by discussing the work of our Rule One Initiative. "The civil justice system is in danger of becoming irrelevant – both to you and to me as citizens, and even to corporations and other business entities. None of us can afford it. It costs too much, takes too long, and is too uncertain."