You are here
This report is based on a study conducted by the Federal Judicial Center for the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management. The study sought information from district court clerks of court about programs, services, and materials their courts have developed to assist pro se litigants and to assist staff in handling pro se cases. The study also sought information from district court chief judges about the impact of pro se litigants on judges and chambers staff and what measures the judges have taken to meet the demands of these cases. This report presents the results of the study. Among the many findings reported are, for example, the number and identity of districts that have established pro bono, mediation, and e-filing programs, the measures clerks and chief judges have found most effective for handing prisoner and non-prisoner pro se cases, and the top issues these cases present for clerks' offices and judges.
During the period January through April of 2007, a case-budgeting attorney (CBA) was hired in each of the Second, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits as part of the Case-Budgeting Attorney Pilot Project authorized by the Judicial Conference of the United States. The primary responsibilities of the CBAs were providing objective case-budgeting advice to attorneys and judges and enhancing case management in the pilot circuits. The Judicial Conference’s Committee on Defender Services asked the Federal Judicial Center to conduct an evaluation of the pilot program. This appendix supplements the final report that was submitted on December 20, 2010.
At the request of the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management, the Federal Judicial Center conducted a study of the use of courtrooms in the U.S. bankruptcy courts. The study, which was conducted from mid-2008 to late 2010, followed completion of a similar study of courtroom use in the federal district courts, see The Use of Courtrooms in U.S. District Courts (2008). Findings reported in the study are based on data collected in nine bankruptcy courts from September 14, 2009, through December 14, 2009, and in nine other bankruptcy courts from January 18, 2010, through April 16, 2010.
Note: Technical appendices 2 and 6 are forthcoming.
Memorandum to the Privacy Subcommittee of the Judicial Conference Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure, April 5, 2010.
This report presents the results of interviews of a small group of attorneys who had completed the Center's case-based survey on the costs of litigation under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The attorneys discuss the principal factors associated with higher litigation costs, particularly discovery, and they also discuss pleading standards, summary judgment, and other procedural matters.
This report compares selected questions from opinion surveys regarding civil litigation completed by members of the American College of Trail Lawyers, ABA Section of Litigation, and National Employment Lawyers Association (NELA).
This report presents a mutlivariate analysis of factors associated with litigation costs in a sample of recently closed civil cases. It uses data first presented in the Center's October 2009 Preliminary Report to the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules and is based on a national case-based survey on the costs of litigation under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
An analysis of all cases filed in federal district courts, bankruptcy courts, and courts of appeals in 2006 revealed that 0.2% of civil cases, 1.6% of criminal cases, 16% of magistrate judge cases, 34% of miscellaneous cases, and 0.1% of appeals were sealed approximately two years after filing. Cases filed in bankruptcy courts are virtually never sealed. This report, prepared for a sealed case subcommittee of the Judicial Conference's standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure, describes why and how cases were sealed.
This report presents preliminary findings from a survey of attorneys in recently closed civil cases which the Federal Judicial Center conducted in May and June 2009. Nearly half of the attorneys invited to participate responded. The report covers discovery activities and case management in the closed cases; electronic discovery activities in the closed cases; attorney evaluations of discovery in the closed cases; the costs of litigation and discovery; and attitudes toward specific reform proposals and, more generally, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.