You are here
Based on a random sample of federal appeals filed in 2002, this article presents analyses of disposition times, the frequency with which both published and unpublished opinions are issued, the average length of counseled briefs and the frequency with which they are filed, the average length of both published and unpublished opinions, and the frequency with which various types of authorities are cited in both briefs and opinions.
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process, Vol. 8, No. 2 (Fall 2006)
Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires each party to disclose to the other, at specified time intervals, a variety of information about their case. These mandatory disclosures are covered by Rule 26: (a)(1) initial disclosure, (a)(2) expert testimony disclosure, and (a)(3) pretrial disclosure. Civil Rule 26 is made applicable to adversary proceedings (APs) in bankruptcy by Rule 7026 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. Rule 26 is Appendix 1. The Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules asked the Federal Judicial Center to survey bankruptcy judges about whether the Committee should recommend an amendment to Bankr. Rule 7026 to exempt certain categories of APs from the mandatory disclosure requirements of Rule 26. These survey results were submitted to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules in March 2004.
This article describes some of the advantages, disadvantages, potential benefits, and limitations of conducting empirical research to inform the civil rulemaking process. The article documents and analyzes the impact of fourteen Center studies during the last fourteen years in response to specific requests from rulemakers who wished to examine empirical data relevant to contemplated changes in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. From 77 Notre Dame Law Review 1121 (April 2002).
This publication offers guidance to federal trial and bankruptcy courts on when and how to refer appropriate cases to ADR and how to manage cases referred to ADR. FJC research found that although much has been written about basic ADR concepts, little comprehensive, easily accessible advice on ADR referrals had been written from the court's perspective. The purpose of the book is not to advocate ADR use but rather to present various approaches that judges and parties may choose to follow when considering and using ADR. The book identifies areas where there may be disagreement, describing advantages and disadvantages of various approaches. The book also alerts readers to emerging trends or what are perceived by many as preferred approaches. The publication's ten chapters have titles including "Considering the Use of ADR: How and When"; "Selecting Cases Appropriate for ADR"; and "Matching the ADR Process to the Case." Other topics covered are neutral selection and compensation; party consent; client attendance; party participation; confidentiality; referral orders and case management issues.
In this issue of the International Judicial Observer:
- Judges from Ten Common-Law Countries Meet in Washington for Five-Day Conference
- U.S. Judge Elected to Lead International Court of Justice
- U.S., Throughout Its History, Has Contributed to Development and Substance of International Law, by Stephen Neff
- Egyptian Conference Focuses on Role of the Judiciary in the Protection of Human Rights
- Yale Law School Establishes Seminar on Global Constitutional Issues
- Broadening Our Horizons: Why American Judges and Lawyers Must Learn About Foreign Law (Adapted from a speech given at the 1997 spring meeting of the American College of Trial Lawyers in Florida), by Sandra Day O'Connor
- Leaders of Russian Judiciary Meet in U.S. to Plan Future of Courts
- The FJC's Visiting Foreign Judicial Fellows Program
- Interview with Judge Alexander Galkin of the Russian Federation
A newspaper published by the Center in cooperation with the American Society of International Law. The International Observer covered international judicial issues. International Judicial Observer was published from 1995-1997. It ceased publication with issue number 4, June 1997.
Proposal seeks funding to underwrite conference to "identify opportunities for research on the relationship between litigation and the delivery of health care services." Issues raised would become subjects of empirical study by smaller groups.