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 Procedure (civil, criminal, evidence, appellate, and bankruptcy).
For a list of projects or other reports of FJC research that the Center has published, click on Research Projects or Reports and Studies.Displaying 31 - 40 of 202
|Appendix E-4: Middle District of Florida — General Procedure Order||Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 56||March 1, 2010|
Appendixes B-G, Index [Superseded]
Appendix B: Court Administration and Case Management Committee, Guidelines for Ensuring Fair and Effective Court-Annexed ADR
Appendix C: Differentiated Case Management System: Local Rules and Forms
Appendix D: Sample Statistical Reports
Appendix E: Bibliography
Appendix F: Table of Statutes
Appendix G: Table of Rules
|Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure||January 1, 2001|
Attorney Choice of Forum in Class Action Litigation: What Difference Does It Make?
This article presents a post-Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) discussion and analysis of data presented previously in An Empirical Examination of Attorneys' Choice of Forum in Class Action Litigation (FJC 2005). Data originated from a national random survey of 728 attorneys who represented plaintiffs and defendants in 621 closed class action cases. New discussion centers on the assumptions underlying CAFA about differences in federal and state court treatment of class actions. New data are presented on the types of cases (nature of suit) and the state of filing for survey cases that were originally filed in state court. From 81 Notre Dame Law Review 591 (January 2006).
|Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 23||January 1, 2006|
Attorney Reports on the Impact of Amchem and Ortiz on Choice of a Federal or State Forum in Class Action Litigation: A Report to the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules Regarding a Case-based Survey of Attorneys
While considering a proposal to amend Fed. R. Civil P. 23 to create new certification standards that would apply only to settlement class actions, the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules sought this empirical research from the Center to help it decide how to proceed. This report is the second phase. For the first phase see Effects of Amchem/Ortiz on the Filing of Federal Class Actions: Report to the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules (2002).
|Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 23||April 1, 2004|
Attorney Satisfaction with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure—Report to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules
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).
|Federal Rules of Civil Procedure||March 1, 2010|
Attorneys' Fees in Class Actions
A circuit-by-circuit review of case law governing award of attorneys' fees in class actions and an examination of abuses in fee requests. The report also includes a discussion of judges' and attorneys' attitudes toward fee computation. Recommendations focus on procedures, implemented early in litigation, designed to avoid problems when fee requests are submitted.
|Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 23||January 1, 1980|
Auctioning the Role of Class Counsel in Class Action Cases: A Descriptive Study
A study conducted by the Center to provide the Third Circuit Task Force on Selection of Class Counsel information on judges who have employed an auction or bidding method to select class counsel. The report describes in detail the auctioning procedures used by the judges, including the process of evaluating bids and selecting the winning bidder. This report is also reprinted at 209 Federal Rules Decisions 519 (2002).
|Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 23||August 29, 2001|
Brady v. Maryland Material in the United States District Courts: Rules, Orders, and Policies
An update of Treatment of Brady v. Maryland Material in United States District and State Courts' Rules, Orders, and Policies, the October 2004 report to the Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules as it and the Standing Committee on the Rules of Practice and Procedure consider proposed amendments to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
|Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, Fed. R. Crim. P. 16||May 31, 2007|
Case Law Divergence from the Federal Rules of Evidence
This report is an effort to increase the awareness of counsel practicing in federal courts, as well as judges, about the possibility that case law has diverged from the text of some of the Federal Rules of Evidence. At the request of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on the Rules of Evidence, Professor Daniel Capra, committee reporter, highlights the major instances in which case law has diverged from an applicable Rule. This divergence comes in two forms: (1) where the case law (defined as case law in at least one circuit) is flatly inconsistent with the text of the Rule, the Committee Note explaining the text, or both; and (2) where the case law has provided significant development on a point that is not addressed by either the text of the Rule or the Committee Note.
This report is reprinted at 197 Federal Rules Decisions 531 (2001).
|Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Evidence||October 3, 2000|
Case Management and Court Management in United States District Courts
An oft-cited analysis of the differences between court management procedures resulting in fast versus slow processing and those resulting in high versus low rates of disposition. This volume reports the overall results of the District Court Studies Project, a long-range effort by the Federal Judicial Center to assist the work of the United States district courts. The goal of the project is to help the courts achieve and reconcile the purpose stated in Rule 1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: "to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action." Specifically, the project has been designed to determine what procedures are associated with the highest possible speed and productivity, consistent with he highest standards of justice. Alternative procedures are examined and recommended.
|Fed. R. Civil P. 1||January 1, 1977|