Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Cost and delay (2)
- Empirical data (2)
- Empirical study (2)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (2)
- Patricia W. Moore (2)
-
- St. Mary's University School of Law (2)
- St. Mary’s University School of Law (2)
- 2015 Proportionality Amendments (1)
- Administrative Office of the United States Courts (1)
- Advisory Committee on Civil Rules (1)
- American Bar Association (1)
- Artificial intelligence (1)
- Business (1)
- Caseload statistics (1)
- Chief Justice (1)
- Civil Rules Advisory Committee (1)
- Civil docket (1)
- Civil filings (1)
- Civil lawsuits (1)
- Civil litigation (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Daubert standard (1)
- Discovery (1)
- Dispositive motions (1)
- Electronically stored information (1)
- Empirical legal research (1)
- Federal District Courts (1)
- Federal Judicial Center (1)
- Federal Rule of Evidence (1)
- Federal court system (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Can Litigation Analytics Tell Us What Became Of The 2015 Proportionality Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure?, Patricia W. Moore
Can Litigation Analytics Tell Us What Became Of The 2015 Proportionality Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure?, Patricia W. Moore
Faculty Articles
In 2015, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure pertaining to discovery were amended for the seventh time in 40 years–part of a cyclic effort to address the so-called “cost and delay” of litigation. The centerpiece of the amendments was the reconfigured requirement that requested discovery be “proportional to the needs of the case,” in addition to being relevant and nonprivileged. The concept of “proportionality” crystallized the 2015 amendments in a single mantra. The proposed amendments inspired passionate and polarized public reactions. Plaintiffs’ attorneys opposed them as an impediment to obtaining the discovery they needed to prove their case, particularly in …
Machine Learning And The New Civil Procedure, Zoe Niesel
Machine Learning And The New Civil Procedure, Zoe Niesel
Faculty Articles
There is an increasing emphasis in the legal academy, the media, and the popular consciousness on how artificial intelligence and machine learning will change the foundations of legal practice. In concert with these discussions, a critical question needs to be explored-As computer programming learns to adjust itself without explicit human involvement, does machine learning impact the procedural practice of law? Civil procedure, while sensitive to technology, has been slow to adapt to change. As such, this Article will explore the impact that machine learning will have on procedural jurisprudence in two significant areas-service of process and personal jurisdiction.
The Article …
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
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 …
The Civil Caseload Of The Federal District Courts, Patricia W. Moore
The Civil Caseload Of The Federal District Courts, Patricia W. Moore
Faculty Articles
This Article responds to changes proposed by Congress and the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules to restrict civil lawsuits by reforming procedure. It argues that while these changes are purported to be based on empirical studies, there is no reference to actual government statistics about whether the civil caseload has grown, whether the median disposition time has increased, or whether the most prevalent types of civil cases have changed. Based on statistics published by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, this Article shows that the civil docket has actually stagnated, not exploded. It first looks at trends in …