You are here


Displaying 1 - 10 of 12
Format: 2019
Greater than or equal to
January 23, 2019
Kathi Vidal, Leeron G. Kalay, Peter S. Menell, Matthew D. Powers, Sarita Venkat

This stage-by-stage, issue-by-issue guide to the mediation of patent disputes supplements the Patent Case Management Judicial Guide (PCMJG), a comprehensive treatise developed for the federal judiciary. The PCMJG addresses the mechanics, timing, and considerations for effective mediation when judges are managing patent cases. This supplement provides analogous guidance to patent mediators (magistrate judges and private mediators), in-house counsel, and litigation counsel.

October 24, 2017

This page includes documents related to the court’s review of fees paid by the debtor to professionals in connection with a Chapter 9 case. In Chapter 9 cases, the debtor may employ professionals without court approval, and the judge reviews fees only within the context of plan confirmation. Sections 327 through 331 of the Bankruptcy Code are not applicable.

January 1, 2014
Meghan A. Dunn

This report summarizes the results of a Center survey of district court judges to assess the frequency with which jurors used social media to communicate during trials and deliberations in the past two years, and to identify strategies for curbing this behavior. The survey was conducted at the request of the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management. The survey also assessed the frequency with which attorneys use social media to conduct research on potential jurors during voir dire.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 52 pages
March 1, 2012
Emery G. Lee

This report summarizes the findings of a study of the operation of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(f) and 16(b) in a nationwide sample of recently terminated civil cases.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 18 pages
March 1, 2010
Emery G. Lee, Thomas E. Willging

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).

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 20 pages
January 1, 2006
Shannon R. Wheatman, Thomas E. Willging

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.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 64 pages
March 1, 1999
Marie Leary, Robert J. Niemic, Melissa Deckman Fallon

Bankruptcy courts are different from the district courts in the attorney conduct area in that attorneys who practice in bankruptcy courts are subject to a complex statutory system, which includes bankruptcy-specific conflict of interest criteria and other standards directly governing attorney conduct. The Judicial Conference Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure in conjunction with the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules requested the Federal Judicial Center to conduct a study of attorney conduct issues in the bankruptcy courts.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 101 pages
June 1, 1997
Marie Leary

The Judicial Conference Committee on Rules and Practice and Procedure studied the effect of having multiple standards of professional conduct for attorneys practicing in the federal district courts. The Federal Judicial Center assisted by reporting on the experiences of federal districts with local rules that govern attorney conduct, and procedures used by the courts to address alleged misconduct.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 70 pages
January 1, 1986
Carroll Seron, John E. Shapard

The results of a survey of practicing attorneys in twelve districts concerning their experience with district court rules that limit the number of interrogatories one party may serve on another without leave of court to serve more.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 31 pages


Subscribe to Attorneys