Law Commons^™

Aligning Incentives And Cost Allocation In Discovery, Jonathan R. Nash, Joanna M. Shepherd

Faculty Articles

Recent proposals to revise Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 to incorporate cost allocation of discovery have sparked considerable controversy. Advocates for reform argue that replacing the long-standing “producer-pays” presumption with something more akin to a “requester-pays” rule would better align economic incentives and reduce litigants’ ability to wield discovery as an instrument to force settlement. Opponents argue that such a reform would limit access to justice by saddling requesters with an ex ante burden of funding the opposition’s discovery.

In this Article, we explain that either a rule requiring both parties to share the costs of discovery (“cost-sharing rule”) …

The Anti-Plaintiff Pending Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure And The Pro-Defendant Composition Of The Federal Rulemaking Committees, Patricia W. Moore

Faculty Articles

For decades, the Civil Rules Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee) has garnered passage of amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) that have incrementally narrowed discovery in the service of the Advisory Committee's stated effort to combat the alleged "cost and delay" of civil litigation. More of the same are on their way to Congress now. In the classical David-and-Goliath lawsuit brought by an individual person against an institutional defendant, these pending amendments hurt David and help Goliath more than any previous round of amendments to the FRCP. The individual versus institution case, not coincidentally, is the most common …

False Security: How Courts Have Improperly Rendered The Protections Of The Protective Order Illusory, Ramona L. Lampley

Faculty Articles

The protective order is perhaps one of the most useful and “taken for granted” discovery devices contemplated by the Colorado and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The purpose of a joint protective order in civil litigation is to permit the parties to produce business information without fear that the information will be disseminated publicly, and with a court order that the information be used only for purposes of the present litigation. Blanket protective orders serve the interests of a just, speedy, and less expensive determination of complex disputes by alleviating the need for and delay occasioned by extensive and repeated …

The Irrepressible Influence Of Byrd, Richard D. Freer, Thomas Arthur

Faculty Articles

We set forth four interrelated theses in this article. First, Byrd is the only Supreme Court case since Erie itself to discuss all three of the core interests balanced, expressly or not, in every vertical choice of law case. Second, because Hanna's "twin aims" test ignores two of these three core interests, it cannot adequately serve as the standard for cases under the Rules of Decision Act ("RDA"). This fact is evidenced by the Court's eschewing the twin aims test in cases, like Gasperini, where state and federal interests must be accommodated. Third, as all three opinions in …

A Uniform Rule Governing The Admission And Practice Of Attorneys Before United States District Courts, Michael S. Ariens

Faculty Articles

The increase in the interstate and international practice of law necessitates a review of the rules governing the admission of attorneys to practice before federal district courts. By virtue of the sweep of their jurisdictional net, federal district courts are likely to be the fora for litigating most interstate or international disputes. The present rules, based upon the antiquated notion that lawyers only rarely practice law in federal district court, and then only in the federal district court located in the state in which they practice, do not address this change in the practice of law.

For these reasons, a …

Rule 3, The Enabling Act, And Statutes Of Limitations, David A. Dittfurth

Faculty Articles

Rule 3 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure appears to be a model of simplicity and clarity. It describes the process for commencement of a civil action, and in defining “commencement” appears to provide guidance on how to begin an action which complies with a statute of limitations.

As a result of the decision in Walker v. Armco Steel Corp., that appearance is misleading regarding state statutes of limitations applicable in federal court actions brought on the basis of diversity of citizenship jurisdiction. There, the Court made reference only to state statutes of limitations, and expressly avoided deciding the …