May 10-11, 2010: Civil Litigation Conference at Duke Law School

A live Webcast is available for the 2010 Civil Litigation Conference, sponsored by the Judicial Conference of the United States, and being held 10-11 May 2010 at Duke University Law School in Durham, North Carolina, USA.

The conference will focus on empirical research on U.S. federal civil litigation, including research on lawyers’ satisfaction with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, judicial decisions (Iqbal and Twombly and cases applying them) respecting pleading rules, ediscovery, the “vanishing trial”, incentives for settlement, and experimentation and proposals respecting civil litigation reform in U.S. states, including research conducted by the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver (IAALS).

Click here for the conference program.

Click here for information about the conference from Duke Law.

Click here for an article about the conference from Tony Mauro at National Law Journal.

IAALS: Fact-Based Pleading: A Solution Hidden in Plain Sight

The Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (IAALS) at the University of Denver has issued a new report entitled Fact-Based Pleading: A Solution Hidden in Plain Sight (2010) (free registration required). Here is a summary:

“It is time to bring fact-based pleading out of the shadows and into the debate over constructive changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Why have these states so steadfastly retained their fact-based pleading requirements over the years, especially in light of pressure to conform to the more general requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure? And what lessons can the federal system draw from their continued commitment to fact-based pleading? In this short paper, we explain how fact-based pleading increases access to the civil justice system, helps control cost and delay by narrowing the parties’ issues in dispute, and is flexible enough to allow all meritorious cases to be presented for the court’s consideration.”

Legal OnRamp members may view and participate in an interesting discussion of this paper.

HT Paul Lippe at Legal OnRamp.

Civil Justice, Case Management, & Discovery Reform Tools from ACTL & IAALS

Two new resources to assist U.S. courts and lawyers in implementing civil justice reform have been issued by the Joint Project of The American College of Trial Lawyers (ACTL) Task Force on Discovery and Civil Justice and The Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver (IAALS):

• 21st Century Civil Justice System: A Roadmap for Reform: Pilot Project Rules (2009). Here is a summary:
• “In March 2009, we published a joint Final Report that contains 29 Principles. Those Principles suggest changes to the civil justice system that would address costs by simplifying and expediting the system. The Final Report can be found on both of our websites at www.actl.com and www.du.edu/legalinstitute. The Principles represent the best thinking of the individuals involved in our project, in collaboration with the broader membership of the ACTL and with experts across the nation. Nonetheless, we understand how important it is to test our proposed solutions before suggesting that they be widely implemented. Accordingly, it is our intention that the Principles be tested in pilot projects in courts around the country, with the projects monitored and measured to determine what works and what does not. In order to be able to apply the Principles in those pilot projects, we have undertaken the task of reducing them to operational Rules. We urge jurisdictions to use these Rules as a roadmap for consideration in creating and implementing a pilot project. IAALS has dedicated a portion of its website to these pilot projects (www.du.edu/legalinstitute/tcri2.html), and will be collecting information as we move forward. IAALS will also be developing metrics to gauge the impact of the pilot projects.”
• 21st Century Civil Justice System: A Roadmap for Reform: Civil Caseflow Management Guidelines (2009). Here is a summary:
• “Excessive litigation costs and delay (separate but closely interrelated concerns) are two of the most serious problems in the civil justice system. These problems not only plague litigants whose cases do get into court, but also negatively affect access to justice, not just for the indigent, but perhaps even for the middle class. These concerns can be addressed meaningfully through caseflow management practices. Effective caseflow management involves much more than reducing time to disposition; it involves timeliness throughout the life of the case. … Another goal of caseflow management is to ensure that each event is meaningful, in that ‘the activity and preparation required for the event to take place on the scheduled date is completed before that date by all involved stakeholders.’ A corollary goal is to assure that effort is not duplicated. When the parties, counsel and the court prepare for an event, that event should occur. Otherwise, the preparation will have to be repeated. Additionally, the event itself should advance the resolution of the case in some way. The Guidelines that follow were drawn from a number of sources, including the Interim and Final Reports of the American College of Trial Lawyers (ACTL) and the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (IAALS), and a recent and extensive IAALS civil case processing study [i.e., Civil Case Processing in the Federal District Courts: A 21st Century Analysis (2009)]. These Guidelines and the discussion of specific suggestions for applying the Guidelines are designed to assist judges in effectively managing the flow of civil cases to ensure that all events in the life of a case are timely and meaningful. … The Operational Protocols accompanying the Guidelines are intended to breathe life into the Guidelines. The Protocols are recommended practices and procedures that will assist judges in implementing the Guidelines. As is true with the Guidelines, not all of the Operational Protocols will be applicable to every case and judges exercising active caseflow management will be best positioned to determine which Protocols should be adopted in each case.” (footnotes omitted)

Both the Rules and the Guidelines include provisions for limiting pretrial discovery.

For more information on the joint project, please see the IAALS Website.