Civil Procedure | Open Access Articles | Digital Commons Network™

Rule 4: Service By Mail May Cost You More Than A Stamp, Ann Varnon Crowley Apr 1986

Rule 4: Service By Mail May Cost You More Than A Stamp, Ann Varnon Crowley

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Proposals To Amend Rule 68- Time To Abandon Ship, Stephen B. Burbank Jan 1986

Proposals To Amend Rule 68- Time To Abandon Ship, Stephen B. Burbank

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

It is no surprise that, having included "facilitating the settlement of the case" as one of the objectives of pretrial conferences in the 1983 amendments to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Advisory Committee has turned its attention to Rule 68. The Rule was intended to provide an incentive to settle by requiring that a prevailing claimant who has declined a more favorable offer of judgment pay post-offer "costs." But, in the Advisory Committee's view, Rule 68 has proved ineffective. The concern, apparently, is not that too few civil cases filed in federal court are settled-less …

Go to article

Practice And Procedure Under Amended Rule 11 Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Kevin P. Roddy, William Woodward Webb Jan 1986

Practice And Procedure Under Amended Rule 11 Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Kevin P. Roddy, William Woodward Webb

Campbell Law Review

The purpose of this article is to explore the substantive provisions of amended Rule 11 and its historic antecedents, the procedure by which sanctions may be sought and/or imposed, the sanctions which the court may impose and the persons upon whom the sanctions can be imposed.

Go to article

For Every Weapon, A Counterweapon: The Revival Of Rule 68, John P. Woods Jan 1986

For Every Weapon, A Counterweapon: The Revival Of Rule 68, John P. Woods

Fordham Urban Law Journal

Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure applies generally where a non-moving party's settlement offer is rejected, and the court judgment awarded to the moving party, or claimant, is for less than the prior offer. The non-moving party may then be entitled to "costs incurred after the making of the offer." In Marek v. Chesny, the Court made it clear that "costs" includes attorney's fees. Congress should consider revising Rule 68 to clarify its application. However, Rule 68 appropriately induces plaintiffs to thoroughly consider a defendant's offer, under threat that rejection of the offer may include reducing attorney's …

Go to article

Proposals To Amend Rule 68 - Time To Abandon Ship, Stephen B. Burbank Jan 1986