You are here
Materials About the Federal Rules
The materials listed below, produced or made available by the Center, are related to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure (appellate, bankruptcy, civil, criminal, and evidence).
Click here for curated content on Rules of Practice and Procedure.
Displaying 11 - 20 of 235
Title |
Rule(s) | Date |
|---|---|---|
|
The Impact of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005: Second Interim Report to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules The Federal Judicial Center has undertaken a long-term study of the impact of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) on the resources of the federal courts. This second interim progress report was presented to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules on September 7, 2006, and reports on the results of statistical tests of the impact of CAFA on federal courts across the country. |
Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 23 | September 7, 2006 |
|
The Impact of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 on the Federal Courts: Fourth Interim Report to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) (Pub. L. No. 109-2, 119 Stat. 4 (2005)) expanded the federal courts' diversity of citizenship jurisdiction over class action litigation. Congress's intent was, in part, to shift some class action litigation from the state courts to the federal courts. Passage of the Act sparked concerns about the impact of these additional class actions on the federal courts' rocedures and workload. In light of these concerns, the Judicial Conference's Advisory Committee on Civil Rules (Advisory Committee)1 asked the Federal Judicial Center (FJC) to study the impact of CAFA on the federal courts. This report marks the end of the first phase of the FJC study on the impact of CAFA on the number of class actions initiated in the federal courts. This report presents interim findings on class actions filings and removals in the federal courts from July 1, 2001, through June 30, 2007. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that CAFA has caused an increased number of class actions based on diversity of citizenship jurisdiction to be filed in the federal courts. |
Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 23 | April 1, 2008 |
|
The Hunt for Sealed Settlement Agreements When a United States senator asked the federal judiciary to look into sealed settlement agreements, the Civil Rules Advisory Committee asked the Federal Judicial Center to undertake a research effort to discover how often settlement agreements are sealed in federal court and under what circumstances. The Center learned that the sealing of settlement agreements in federal court is rare, and typically the only part of the court record kept secret by the sealing of a settlement agreement is the amount of settlement. This article describes how the Center developed its research project to address the senator's concerns. From 81 Chicago-Kent Law Review, 439-62 (2006). For the published results of the research project, see Sealed Settlement Agreements in Federal District Courts (2004). |
Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure | September 12, 2006 |
|
The Elements of Case Management, Third Edition This manual describes techniques that judges have found effective in managing their cases at various stages of the litigation process. |
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure | June 19, 2017 |
|
The August 1983 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: Promoting Effective Case Management and Lawyer Responsibility An informal discussion, adapted from a lecture at a Center workshop, of the amendments to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 7, 11, 16, and 26. The author, then a member of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules, explains the reasons for the changes and the responsibilities the amendments impose on both lawyers and judges. |
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 11, Fed. R. Civil P. 16, Fed. R. Civil P. 26, Fed. R. Civil P. 7 | January 1, 1984 |
|
The Analysis and Decision of Summary Judgment Motions: A Monograph on Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure The authors suggest ways of thinking about summary judgment that can help judges and lawyers make more effective use of the rule as a vehicle to reach the objectives of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1: the just, speedy, and inexpensive resolution of litigation. (Also see the authors' Summary Judgment After Eastman Kodak, 45 Hastings Law Journal 1 (1993), which is reprinted at 154 F.R.D. 311 (1994)). |
Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 56 | January 1, 1991 |
|
Technology-Assisted Review for Discovery Requests: A Pocket Guide for Judges This pocket guide summarizes the essential concepts behind a variety of labor-saving techniques, known generally as technology-assisted review (TAR), that help identify documents for production. The guide outlines possible factors for ascertaining whether and how the use of TAR may qualify as a reasonable inquiry under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(g). It also provides an illustrative order for governing the use of TAR in civil litigation. |
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 26 | March 28, 2017 |
|
Survey on the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure A report of the results of a Center survey of participants in the bankruptcy system concerning their views of the Bankruptcy Rules and related forms. The Long-Range Planning Subcommittee of the Judicial Conference's Committee on Bankruptcy Rules requested the survey as part of a comprehensive review of the rules to determine whether they should be modified. After reviewing this report and the survey comments, the subcommittee identified three areas for possible further study: litigation practice, attorney admissions and ethics, and inconsistencies in the hearing requirements of Bankruptcy Code provisions and related Bankruptcy Rules. |
Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure | March 13, 1996 |
|
Survey of Literature on Discovery from 1970 to the Present: Expressed Dissatisfactions and Proposed Reforms An analysis of a broad range of literature dealing with the discovery provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The author examines how well the rules are functioning and makes suggestions for change and reform. |
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure | January 1, 1978 |
|
Survey of District Court Judges on a Proposed Amendment to Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) Concerning Prior Consistent Statements This report was prepared for the Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules of Evidence. Under the current version of Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(1)(B), prior consistent statements are admissible for their substance as well as for their rehabilitation only if they rebut recent fabrication because they occurred before the fabrication motive. If a prior consistent statement is admissible for credibility but not admissible for substance, the opposing party is entitled to a jury instruction. Because of perceived difficulties with such an instruction, an amendment to Rule 801(d)(1)(B) was proposed to the Evidence Rules Committee. This paper reports the results of an FJC survey of district judges on matters related to the proposed amendment. |
Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Evidence, Fed. R. Evid. 801 | March 2, 2012 |