Lawyers Spar Over Discovery Rules
From the National Law Journal
Another major front in the war between plaintiffs and corporate defendants over the high costs of litigation has opened up in an obscure corner of judicial bureaucracy: proposed changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
More than 2,200 lawyers and others took the time in recent weeks to file sometimes impassioned comments with a committee of the Judicial Conference over proposals to narrow pretrial discovery and ease sanctions for failure to preserve documents. The deadline for comments was Feb. 18.
Dense terms like "spoliation" and "proportionality" punctuate soaring claims that the changes would either save the economy from ruinous discovery expenses or slam shut the courthouse door for legitimate claims of civil rights and other violations.
"There's been a huge outpouring of interest," said professor Edward Cooper of the University of Michigan Law School, the reporter for the committee that will read the comments. The response is "way beyond" what any past court rulemaking generated, Cooper said, at least since he became part of the process in 1992.
Most of the controversy has focused on two proposals that could significantly change the way civil litigation is conducted across the country. One would give high priority to confining discovery to documents that are relevant and proportional to the needs of a case — eliminating the "ask for everything" approach that critics say has drastically increased costs. The other change would make it easier for parties to destroy or not retain millions of documents they now preserve for fear of being sued for "spoliation."
Read more in our daily News Update...
From the National Law Journal
Another major front in the war between plaintiffs and corporate defendants over the high costs of litigation has opened up in an obscure corner of judicial bureaucracy: proposed changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
More than 2,200 lawyers and others took the time in recent weeks to file sometimes impassioned comments with a committee of the Judicial Conference over proposals to narrow pretrial discovery and ease sanctions for failure to preserve documents. The deadline for comments was Feb. 18.
Dense terms like "spoliation" and "proportionality" punctuate soaring claims that the changes would either save the economy from ruinous discovery expenses or slam shut the courthouse door for legitimate claims of civil rights and other violations.
"There's been a huge outpouring of interest," said professor Edward Cooper of the University of Michigan Law School, the reporter for the committee that will read the comments. The response is "way beyond" what any past court rulemaking generated, Cooper said, at least since he became part of the process in 1992.
Most of the controversy has focused on two proposals that could significantly change the way civil litigation is conducted across the country. One would give high priority to confining discovery to documents that are relevant and proportional to the needs of a case — eliminating the "ask for everything" approach that critics say has drastically increased costs. The other change would make it easier for parties to destroy or not retain millions of documents they now preserve for fear of being sued for "spoliation."
Read more in our daily News Update...