Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Federal Rules Update: Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Procedure And Evidence, David A. Schlueter Jan 2009

Federal Rules Update: Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Procedure And Evidence, David A. Schlueter

Faculty Articles

In a very unusual step, Congress enacted Federal Rule of Evidence 502. This rule deals with the attorney-client and work product privileges. The proposal for this rule was driven primarily by the concern over rising litigation costs associated with discovery, especially electronic discovery. Experience had demonstrated that in complex litigation cases lawyers spend considerable time and effort to preserve privileged documents. If a privileged document is mistakenly produced, there is a risk that a court would find subject matter waiver, not only in the case at bar, but in other cases as well.

The new rule became effective on September …


Federal Rules Update: Technology-Related Rules, David A. Schlueter Jan 2009

Federal Rules Update: Technology-Related Rules, David A. Schlueter

Faculty Articles

In June 2009, the Standing Committee on the Federal Rules of Procedure and Evidence authorized publication for comment on a number of technology-related rules of criminal procedure. Criminal Rule 1 would state that the terms “telephone,” “telephonic,” or “telephonically” mean any form or live electronic voice communication. Rule 3 would allow officers to submit a complaint and supporting material electronically. Changes to Rule 4 would address electronically processed and submitted arrest warrants. Proposed new Rule 4.1 would permit magistrate judges to consider information presented electronically in deciding whether to issue a warrant or summons or approve a complaint. The amendment …


Pleading And The Dilemmas Of “General Rules”, Stephen B. Burbank Jan 2009

Pleading And The Dilemmas Of “General Rules”, Stephen B. Burbank

All Faculty Scholarship

This article comments on Professor Geoffrey Miller’s article about pleading under Tellabs and goes on (1) to use Tellabs, Bell Atlantic Corp. v Twombly, and Iqbal v. Hasty (in which the Court has granted review) to illustrate the limits of, and costs created by, certain foundational assumptions and operating principles that are associated with the Rules Enabling Act’s requirement of “general rules,” and (2) more generally, to illustrate the costs of the complex procedural system that we have created. Thus, for instance, the argument that the standards emerging from Twombly should be confined to antitrust conspiracy cases confronts the foundational …