UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF KANSAS TABLE OF CONTENTS RULE 1 TASK FORCE DOCUMENTS. Initial Order Regarding Planning and Scheduling...

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF KANSAS TABLE OF CONTENTS RULE 1 TASK FORCE DOCUMENTS. Initial Order Regarding Planning and Scheduling..."

Transcription

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF KANSAS TABLE OF CONTENTS RULE 1 TASK FORCE DOCUMENTS Pages Initial Order Regarding Planning and Scheduling Rule 26(f) Report of Parties' Planning Conference Scheduling Order Pretrial Order Guidelines for Cases Involving Electronically Stored Information (ESI) Guidelines for Agreed Protective Orders (with pre-approved form order) Summary Judgment Guidelines Proposed Technical Amendments to Local Rules Note: The page numbers as stated in this table of contents are as assigned by the combined Adobe Acrobat document.

2 (Rev. _/_/13) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Plaintiff(s), v. Case No.~~~~~- Defendant(s ). INITIAL ORDER REGARDING PLANNING AND SCHEDULING Fed. R. Civ. P. I mandates the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of civil cases. With that goal in mind, the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge, ~~~~~~~~~~~~-' will conduct a scheduling conference in this case in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 on (date), at (time) [approximately 60 days after this order is filed]. The conference will be held [in Room of the U.S. Courthouse at m [Kansas City] [Wichita] [Topeka], Kansas] [by video conference] [by telephone]. [The court will initiate the conference call, and the attorneys who have entered an appearance must be available for the conference call at the telephone numbers listed in the pleadings.] The parties, in person and/or through counsel, must confer as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) by(date) [at least 21 days before the Rule 16 scheduling conference with the court]. Generally, discussion at this planning conference must address the nature and basis of the 0 :\Standard izal i on\20 13 \F-In iii al0rdcr(20 13 )\'4. wpd

3 parties' claims and defenses; the possibilities of settling or resolving the case, including the use of mediation or other methods of alternative dispute resolution; making or at least arranging for the disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26( a)(!); any issues about preserving discoverable information; and development of a proposed discovery plan. More specifically, the agenda items that must be addressed during this conference include those set out in Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(c)(2)(A)-(P), Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f)(3)(A)-(F), and the planning report form that is attached to this order and that is also posted on the court's website: uscourts. govlreport-o[-parties-planning-con&rence! By (date) [14 days after the Rule 26(/} meeting deadline], plaintiff(s) must submit the completed report of the parties' planning conference to the chambers of the undersigned magistrate judge, along with copies of the parties' Rule 26( a) initial disclosures. The report must follow the prescribed form and must be submitted electronically in.pdf format as an attachment to an sent to ksd ljudge 7 gov. It must not be filed with the Clerk's Office. If you have questions concerning the requirements of this order, please contact the undersigned judge's courtroom deputy,, at, or by at ksd uscourts.gov. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated, 20, at ~' Kansas. U.S. Magistrate Judge 0: \Standardiznt10n\20 13\f -In it ia 10rder(20 13 )\'4. wp d 2

4 (Rev. _/_113) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Plaintiff(s), v. Case No. Defendant(s). REPORT OF PARTIES' PLANNING CONFERENCE [Completed form should be spaced as shown.] [Use separate paragraphs or subparagraphs as necessary if the parties 1 disagree.] Introductory Note: Rule 1 of the Fede1 al Rules of Civil Procedure calls for the "just, speedy, and inexpensive" determination of civil cases. Careful planning is essential to efficient case management and discove1 y proceedings. The court strongly encourages the parties to conduct their planning conferences under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) in pe1 son instead of by telephone, to improve the quality of discussion. In any event it's unacceptable to simply exchange draft planning reports by . The court also stmngly encourages "first chair" trial counsel to be meaningfully involved in this critical planning process. 1 As used in this report, the term "plaintiff' includes plaintiffs as well as counterclaimants, cross-claimants, third-party plaintiffs, intervenors, and any other parties who assert affirmative claims for relief. The term "defendant" includes defendants as well as counterclaim defendants, cross-claim defendants, third-party defendants, and any other parties who are defending against affirmative claims for relief. However, when the parties actually complete and submit this report, they should accurately describe their posture in the case. 0:\Slandt~rdizmion\20 13\F-PimmingRcport (20 IJ)v4.wpd

5 Before the parties conduct thcil planning conference and attempt to complete this required planning report form, instead of just mechanically filling in the blanks, the court expects them to review and be prepared to address all the specific agenda items mentioned in Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(c)(2)(A)-(O) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f)(3)(A)-(F). The parties should think creatively and, to the extent possible, cooperatively, about how to structure this case in a way that leads to the efficient resolution of the factual and legal issues presented. This court, like the Kansas Supreme Court, has formally adopted the Kansas Bar Association's Pillars of Professionalism (2012) as aspirational goals to guide lawyers in their pursuit of civility, professionalism, and service to the public. Counsel arc expected to familiarize themselves with the Pillars of Professionalism and conduct themselves accordingly when litigating cases in this court. The Pillars of Professionalism arc available on this court's website: Discovery of electronically stored information (ESI) is unduly expensive if it's not managed properly. Therefore, counsel must become generally knowledgeable about their clients' information management systems before the planning conference. That is, counsel must be prepared to discuss at the conference how their clients' information is stored and retrieved, and in tum be prepared to discuss and resolve the specific issues raised in the ESI guidelines posted on this court's website: h lip :1/w ww. ksd.usco uris. govlg 11 i deli 11 es/el eclron icdiscoveryg 11 ide lin es.pdf 1. Rule 26(1) Conference. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f), a discovery and case management conference was held on (date), and was attended by [list appearances]. The conference was conducted [in person at (place)] [by telephone]. 2. Preliminary Matters. I. The following persons will appear at the upcoming Rule 16 scheduling conference with the magistrate judge: [Insert names of all parties and counsel who will appear at the scheduling conference and, if the coriference is scheduled to occur by video conference or telephone, the telephone numbers where parties and/or counsel may be reached at the designated time.] 0:\Standardization\20 13\F-PianningRcporl (20 13)v4. wpd -2-

6 2. The parties provide the following information regarding themselves and their counsel: [For each attorney, insert: (1) name; (2) business address; (3) home, business, and cellular telephone and facsimile numbers; and (4) address. For each party, insert: (1) name; (2) home and business addresses; (3) home and business telephone and facsimile numbers; and (4) address.] 3. The parties jointly submit the following case summary: [Insert a brief summary of the case, preferably in a single paragraph and no more than one page, which states: (I) the genera/nature of the case, e.g., employment discrimination, personal in)wj', etc.; (2) the statutes asserted to confer subject matter jurisdiction, e.g., 28 US. C. 1332; (3) the plaintiff's legal theories, and (4) the primary defenses pleaded by defendant.] 3. Plan for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). l. The parties already have engaged in the following good faith efforts to resolve this matter: [describe efforts}. 2. Plaintiff will submit a written, good faith settlement proposal to defendant by (date). Defendant will make a written, good faith counter-proposal by (date). By (date), unless the parties have jointly filed a notice stating whom they have selected to serve as mediator, along with the firmly scheduled date, time, and place of mediation, each party will submit a confidential settlement report to the assigned magistrate judge. [Note: In order to facilitate the ADR process, the court usually will require the parties to complete their exchange of settlement proposals within 30 days after the scheduling conference.] 3. The parties have agreed on the following ADR procedure, which will be accomplished by: [insert agreed procedure, e.g., mediation, and a deadline, which usually should be within days of the scheduling conference]. 4. Plan for Pre-Discovery Disclosures. The parties will exchange the information required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(l) by (date) [no later than 14 days after the planning conference]. [Optional: In order to facilitate settlement negotiations and to avoid unnecessary expense, the parties have agreed that, without any need for formal requests for production, copies of the various documents described in the 0.\S!andardizalion\2013\F.plnnningReport (2013)\'4.wpd -3-

7 parties' respective Rule 26( a)( 1) disclosures will be [exchanged] [made available for inspection and copying] by (date).] [Note: As indicated in the Initial Order Regarding Planning and Scheduling, copies of the parties' initial disclosures under Rule 26(a)(l) must be attached to the parties' completed Rule 26(f) planning report. These disclosures will be discussed with the magistrate judge during the upcoming scheduling conference in finalizing a discovery and case plan that achieves the objectives of Rule 1.] 5. Plan for Discovery. The parties jointly propose to the court the following discovery plan: 1. Discovery is needed on the following specific subjects: [list]. [Note: The parties should try to reach early stipulations about those matters that arc not in dispute, to ensure that discovery, particularly involving ESI, is conducted only on those matters legitimately in dispute.] 2. All discovery will be commenced or served in time to be completed by (date). [Note: In the court's experience, discovery usually can be completed in 4-6 months. If more time is necessary due to the complexity of this case, specific t easons for the request must be provided.] 3. [If applicable] Discovery on (issue for early discovery) will be completed by (date). [Note: The parties should consider whcthct any issues should be bifurcated, or whether a limited amount of highly focused discovery would enable them to pat ticipatc in early mediation m pt csent substantive issues on dispositive motions and in turn narrow the scope of remaining discovery.] 4. One or more of the parties anticipate the following problem(s) in discovery, which should be discussed with the court and, if possible, resolved at the scheduling conference: [List problem(s), the positions and supporting authority of each party, and what efforts have been made to resolve the problems.] O:\Standardization\20 13\F-PianningReport (20 13)\"1. wpd -4-

8 5. Disclosure or discovery of electronically stored information (ESI) will be handled as follows: [Provide a brief description of the parties' agreement or separate proposals.] [Note: The court requires that the parties directly address the issue ofesi instead of avoiding it. Therefore, it's unacceptable for the parties to vaguely state in their planning report, for example, "that discovet y ofesi will be conducted in accordance with the Fed. R. Civ. P." The parties must confer and then decide on a reasonably specific protocol for retrieving and producing ESI. However, the parties may agt ee, for economic reasons or otherwise in a small case, that no discovery of ESI will be conducted or that any limited ESI that docs exist will simply be printed out in hard copy form. ] 6. With regard to claims of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation material asserted after production, the parties have agreed to an order as follows: [Provide a brief description of the parties' proposal. Also, state whether the parties wish their agreement to be reflected in the court's scheduling order or in a separate proposed protective order that will be submitted to the court.] [Note: The pat tics should be mindful that Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(S)(B), which generally contemplates such things as "quick peck" and "clawback" agreements with regard to attorney-client privileged communications and trial-preparation materials, is not limited to ESI. Also, under Fed. R. Evid. 502, an agreement on the effect of a disclosure in a federal proceeding is binding only on the parties to the agreement unless that agt ccment also is incorporated into a com t order; a federal court's order that a privilege or protection is not waived by disclosure is binding in other federal court and state court proceedings.] 7. To encourage cooperation, efficiency, and economy in discovery, and also to limit discovery disputes, the following procedures have been agreed to by parties in this case: [Note: The parties arc sti'ongly encouraged to consider using the so-called Susman agreements that arc posted on the following website:!tttp:llwww.trialbyagreement.com 0:\Stnndardizalion\2013\f-PI:mningRcport (2013)v4.wpd -5-

9 8. There will be a maximum of interrogatories, including all discrete subparts, served by any party on another party. 9. There will be a maximum of depositions taken by plaintiff and by defendant. 10. Each deposition [other than :-:-:-:--cc:-'. will be limited to hours; the depositions of will be limited to hours. 11. [Optional: The parties have stipulated that no expert testimony will be used in this case.] If expert testimony is used in this case, disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2), including reports from retained expetts, will be served by plaintiff by (date), and by defendant by (date). [Option 1: The parties have stipulated that rebuttal experts will not be permitted in this case.] [Option 2: Disclosures and reports by any rebuttal experts will be served by (date).] 12. The parties [agree] [disagree] that physical or mental examinations pursuant Fed. R. Civ. P. 35 [are] [are not] appropriate in this case. In any event, all Rule 3 5-examinations will be completed by (date). [Note: If the parties disagree about the need for or the scope of such an examination, a formal motion must be filed sufficiently in advance of this deadline in order to allow the motion to be fully briefed by the parties, the motion to be decided by the court, and for the examination to be conducted, all before the deadline expires.] I 3. Supplementations of disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e) will be served at such times and under such circumstances as required by that rule. In addition, such supplemental disclosures will be served ([optional] dates or intervals), and in any event 40 days before the deadline for completion of all discovery. [Note: Based on the investigation and discovery conducted as of that date, the supplemental disclosures served 40 days before the deadline for completion of all discovery must identify all witnesses and exhibits that probably or even might be used at trial.] 14. The parties [agree] [disagree] that there [is] [is not] a need for discovery in this case to be governed by a protective order. If the parties agree concerning the need for and scope and form of such a protective order, they must confer and then submit a jointly proposed protective order by (date). A jointly proposed protective order must include a concise but sufficiently specific recitation of 0:\Siandardization\20 13\F-PianningReport (2013)v4.wpd -6-

10 the particular facts in this case that would provide the court with an adequate basis upon which to make the required finding of good cause pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26( c). If the parties disagree concerning the need for, and/or the scope or form of a protective order, the party or parties seeking such an order must file an appropriate motion and supporting memorandum by (date). Jointly proposed protective orders should be drafted in compliance with the guidelines available on the court's website: ksd. uscourfs. govlguidelines-tor-agreed-protective-orders-district-of.kansas/ A pre-approved form of protective order can be downloaded from the court's website: ksd. uscourts. gov/ The parties should discuss whether any depmtures from this pre-approved form order would be appropriate in this case and also be prepared to explain such proposed modifications during the scheduling conference with the magistrate judge. 15. The parties do [do not] consent to electronic service of disclosures and discovery requests and responses. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b) and D. Kan. Rules and Deadlines for Amendments and Potentially Dispositive Motions. l. A motion to dismiss [is] [is not] expected to be filed in this case, based on (state the grounds). Provided that such defenses have been timely preserved, any motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, venue, insufficiency of process or service of process, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or the propriety of the parties, will be filed by (date). [Note: This deadline usually should be set 2-3 weeks after the scheduling conference. But to avoid cases getting bogged down with wasteful motion practice, during the planning conference, counsel must notify the opposing counsel or party of all curable defects in the pleadings that will be the subject of a motion to dismiss.] 0:\Siandardization\20 13\f-PianningReport (20 13)v4. wpd -7-

11 2. Any motion for leave to join additional parties or to otherwise amend the pleadings will be filed by (date). [Note: This deadline usually should be set 6-8 weeks after the scheduling conference.] 3. Other dispositive motions (e.g., summary judgment) [are] [are not] expected to be filed in this case. All such motions will be filed by (date). [Note: This deadline usually should be set approximately 2-4 weeks after the pretl"ial conference. The court will attempt to decide all dispositive motions, to the extent they've been timely filed and briefed without any extensions having been requested, approximately 60 days before trial. If the case is unusually complex, such that it would be more efficient to have a day gap between dispositive motion rulings and trial, the parties should explain why that would be appropriate here.] 4. All motions to exclude testimony of expert witnesses pursuant to Fed. R. Ev id , Daubertv. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), or similar case law, will be filed by (date). [Note: Genemlly, most judges in the District of Kansas tend to defer setting the Daubert motion deadline until days before trial (unless counsel agree that resolution of the case would be foste1 ed by having such motions filed and decided earlier). If Daubert motions potentially would be dispositive of the entire case or even certain claims in the case (e.g., a challenge to a standard-of-care expert in a medical negligence case), then this deadline should be the same as the dispositive motion deadline mentioned above. Counsel should be mindful that some judges in this district usc a single deadline for dispositive motions and Daubert motions in all of their cases. 0: \S lamia rd i7.n 1 ion\20 13 \F-Plann ingreport (20 I J )v4. wpd -8-

12 7. Other Items. 1. The parties agree that principles of comparative fault do not apply to this case. [By (date), any party asserting comparative fault must identify all persons or entities whose fault is to be compared for purposes of Kan. Stat. Ann a (or any other similar comparative fault statute that might be applicable). If another person or entity is so identified, then the party asserting comparative fault also must specify the nature of the fault which is claimed.] [Note: This deadline, if applicable, usually should be set approximately 2 weeks before the deadline for filings motions to amend the pleadings.] 2. The parties [request] [do not request] a status conference before the pretrial conference, in order to discuss the following subjects: [list). [The parties request a status conference in (month and year).] 3. The parties request that the court hold a pretrial conference in (month and year). [Note: The court generally schedules a pretrial conference approximately 2-3 weeks after the close of discovery and approximately 2-4 weel\s befo1 e the dispositive motion deadline. If the case remains at issue after all timely filed dispositive motions have been filed and decided (or if the parties announce that no dispositive motions will be filed), then the trial judge usually will conduct another pretrial conference within 30 days of trial.] 4. Trial is expected to take approximately_ trial days. 5. The parties [are] [are not] prepared to consent to trial by a U.S. Magistrate Judge [at this time,] [or as a backup if the assigned U.S. District Judge determines that his or her schedule is unable to accommodate the scheduled trial date]. [Note: Magistrate judges may preside over jury trials. Withholding consent will not have any adverse substantive consequences, but may delay the trial of the case.] Date: [Insert Date] 0:\Standardizalion\20 13\f-PianningRcport (20 13)\ 4. \\lld -9-

13 [Here, add signatures of each unrepresented party and an attorney for each represented party. These signatures must be affixed according to the procedures governing multiple signatures set forth in paragraph II( C) of the Administrative Procedures for Filing, Signing, and Verijj,ing Pleadings and Papers by Electronic Means in Civil Cases. The report must be submitted electronically in.pdf format as an attachment to an Internet sent to the e mail address of the assigned magistrate judge listed in paragraph II(E)(2)( c) of the administrative procedures guide.] 0.\Siandardization\2013\F PlanningRcport (2013)\'4.wpd -10-

14 (Rev. _)_)13) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Plaintiff(s ), v. Case No Defendant(s). SCHEDULING ORDER On (date), in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 16, the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge,,, conducted a scheduling conference in this case with the parties.' Plaintiff appeared [through counsel, (list attorneys)] [in person]. Defendant appeared [through counsel, (list attorneys)] [in person]. After consultation with the parties, the court enters this scheduling order, summarized in the table that follows: 'As used in this scheduling order, the term "plaintiff' includes plaintiffs as well as counterclaimants, cross-claimants, third-parly plaintiffs, intetvenors, and any other patties who assert affirmative claims for relief. The term "defendant" includes defendants as well as counterclaim defendants, cross-claim defendants, third-parly defendants, and any other parties who are defending against affirmative claims for relief. 0:\S landanj iz.afion\20 13\F -Sched0rdcr(20 13 )v4. wpd

15 I SUMMARY OF DEADLINES AND SETTINGS I Event Deadline/Setting Plaintiff's settlement proposal Defendant's settlement counter-proposal Jointly filed mediation notice, or confidential settlement reports to magistrate judge Mediation completed Supplementation of initial disclosures All discovery completed Experts disclosed by plaintiff Experts disclosed by defendant Rebuttal experts disclosed Physical and mental examinations Jointly proposed protective order submitted to court Motion and brief in support of proposed protective order (only if parties disagree about need for and/or scope of order) Motions to dismiss Motions to amend All other potentially dispositive motions (e.g., summary judgment), and motions challenging admissibility of expert testimony Comparative fault identification Status conference Proposed pretrial order due Pretrial conference Trial 0. \S tandardiza lion\20 13\F-Schcd0rder(20 13 )v4. wpd -2-

16 1. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). After discussing ADR during the scheduling conference, the court has determined that settlement of this case potentially [would] [would not] be enhanced by use of early mediation. Toward that end, plaintiff must submit a good faith settlement proposal to defendant by (date). Defendant must make a good faith counter-proposal by (date). By (date), unless the parties have jointly filed a notice stating the full name, mailing address, and telephone number of the person whom they have selected to serve as mediator, along with the firmly scheduled date, time, and place of mediation, each party must submit a confidential settlement report by to the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge (but not the presiding U.S. District Judge). These reports must briefly set forth the parties' settlement efforts to date, current evaluations of the case, views concerning future settlement negotiations, the overall prospects for settlement, and a specific recommendation regarding mediation or any other ADR method. If the parties cannot agree on a mediator and any party wishes the court to consider a particular mediator or other ADR neutral, then up to three nominations may be provided in the confidential settlement reports; such nominations must include a statement of the nominee's qualifications and billing rates, and confirmation that the nominee already has pre-cleared all ethical and scheduling conflicts. These reports must not be filed with the Clerk's Office. Absent further order of the court, mediation must be held no later than (date). An ADR report must be filed by defense counsel within 14 days of any scheduled ADR process, using the form located on the comt's website: ksd. uscourts. govladr-report/ 0:\Siandardization\20 1 J\F-Sched0rder(20 13)v4. wpd -3-

17 2. Discovery. 1. The parties already have served their initial disclosures with regard to witnesses, exhibits, damage computations, and any applicable insurance coverage, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1 ). Supplementations of those disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e) must be served at such times and under such circumstances as required by that rule. In addition, such supplemental disclosures must be served ([optional] insert dates or intervals), and in any event 40 days before the deadline for completion of all discove1y. The supplemental disclosures served 40 days before the deadline for completion of all discovery must identify all witnesses and exhibits that probably or even might be used at trial. The opposing party and counsel should be placed in a realistic position to make judgments about whether to take a particular deposition or pursue follow-up "written" discovery before the time allowed for discovery expires. Should anything be included in the final disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) that has not previously appeared in the initial Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures or a timely Rule 26(e) supplement thereto, the witness or exhibit probably will be excluded from offering any testimony under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c)(l). 2. All discovery must be commenced or served in time to be completed by (dale). 3. [Optional: The parties have stipulated that no expert testimony will be used in this case.] If expert testimony is used in this case, disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2), including reports from retained experts, must be served by plaintiff by (date), and by defendant by (date). [Option 1: The parties have stipulated that rebuttal experts will not be permitted in this case.] [Option 2: Disclosures and reports by any rebuttal experts must 0:\Standardization\20 13\I~ Schcd0rder(20 13)\'4. wpd -4-

18 be served by (date).] The parties must serve any objections to such disclosures (other than objections pursuant to Fed. R. Evid , Daubertv. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), or similar case law), within 14 days after service of the disclosures. These objections should be confined to technical objections related to the sufficiency of the written expert disclosures (e.g., whether all of the information required by Rule 26(a)(2)(B) has been provided) and need not extend to the admissibility of the expert's proposed testimony. If such technical objections are served, counsel must confer or make a reasonable effort to confer consistent with D. Kan. Rule 37.2 before filing any motion based on those objections. 4. The parties [agree] [disagree] that physical or mental examinations pursuant Fed. R. Civ. P. 35 [are] [are not] appropriate in this case. [The parties must complete all physical or mental examinations under Fed. R. Civ. P. 35 by (date). If the parties disagree about the need for or the scope of such an examination, a formal motion must be filed sufficiently in advance of this deadline in order to allow the motion to be fully briefed by the parties, the motion to be decided by the court, and for the examination to be conducted, all before the deadline expires.] 5. The court [considered] [resolved] the following discovery problem(s) raised by one or more of the parties: (List problem(s) and resolution(s). i[anv). 6. Consistent with the parties' agreements as set fm1h in their planning conference report, electronically stored information (ESI) in this case will be handled as follows: (Describe any specific agreements set forth in the Rule 26(/) report). 0:\Staml(lrdization\20 J3\fo-Scl ed0rder(20 13)v4. wpd -5-

19 7. Consistent with the parties' agreements as set forth in their planning conference report, claims of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation material asserted after production will be handled as follows: (Describe anv "quick veek. " "claw back. " or other agreements set forth in the Rule 26(0 report). 8. To encourage cooperation, efficiency, and economy in discovery, and also to limit discovery disputes, the court adopts as its order the following procedures agreed to by parties and counsel in this case [e.g., the Susman pretrial [trial] agreements, available at trialbyagreement.com]: 9. No party may serve more than _ interrogatories, including all discrete subparts, on any other party. 10. No more than_ depositions may be taken by plaintiff, and no more than_ depositions may be taken by defendant. II. Each deposition must be limited to_ hours, except for the deposition(s) of which must be limited to _ hours. All depositions must be governed by the written guidelines that are available on the court's website: ksd. uscourts. fjov!depos ition-fjuidelines/ 12. [Optional] Discovery in this case may be governed by a protective order. If the parties agree concerning the need for and scope and form of such a protective order, they must confer and then submit a jointly proposed protective order by (date). This proposed protective order should be drafted in compliance with the guidelines available on the court's website: 0: \S tandanliza lion\20 13\F-S ched0rdcr(20 I 3 )v4. "Vd -6-

20 http: I lw1 vw. ksd. uscourts. gov/ guidelines-for-agreed-protect ive-orders-disfrict -of-kansas/ At a minimum, such proposed orders must include a concise but sufficiently specific recitation of the particular facts in this case that would provide the court with an adequate basis upon which to make the required finding of good cause pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). A pre-approved form of protective order is available on the court's website: uscourts. gov/ If the parties disagree concerning the need for, and/or the scope or form of a protective order, the party or parties seeking such an order must file an appropriate motion and supporting memorandum, with the proposed protective order attached, by (date). 13. The parties do [do not] consent to electronic service of disclosures and discovery requests and responses. See Fed. R. Civ. P. S(b) and D. Kan. Rules ancl The expense and delay often associated with civil litigation can be dramatically reduced if the parties and counsel conduct discovery in the "just, speedy, and inexpensive" manner mandated by Feel. R. Civ. P. I. Accordingly, the parties are respectfully reminded that this court plans to strictly enforce the certification requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g). Among other things, Rule 26(g)(l) provides that, by signing a discovery request, response, or objection, it's certified as (i) consistent with the applicable rules and warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law, or for establishing new law; (ii) not interposed for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation; and (iii) neither unreasonable nor unduly burdensome or expensive, considering the needs of the case, prior 0:\Standardization\20 13\f-Sched0rdcr(20 13 )\'4. wpd -7-

Case4:12-cv-03288-KAW Document2-1 Filed06/25/12 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION

Case4:12-cv-03288-KAW Document2-1 Filed06/25/12 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION Case4:12-cv-03288-KAW Document2-1 Filed06/25/12 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION STANDING ORDER FOR MAGISTRATE JUDGE KANDIS A. WESTMORE (Revised

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION. Case No. 5:07-CV-231-F

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION. Case No. 5:07-CV-231-F IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No. 5:07-CV-231-F PAMELA L. HENSLEY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) PROPOSED JOINT JOHNSTON COUNTY BOARD

More information

INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN

INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN The following provisions apply to civil cases filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana that are not exempt from filing

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA. CASE NO.: 16- DIVISION: CV- vs. Plaintiff, Defendant. ORDER SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL AND PRETRIAL CONFERENCE AND REQUIRING

More information

United States District Court

United States District Court Case 4:11-cv-00655-RC-ALM Document 184 Filed 03/26/13 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 3232 United States District Court EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. Civil Action

More information

DEFENSE RESEARCH INSTITUTE RECOMMENDED CASE HANDLING GUIDELINES FOR INSURERS

DEFENSE RESEARCH INSTITUTE RECOMMENDED CASE HANDLING GUIDELINES FOR INSURERS DEFENSE RESEARCH INSTITUTE RECOMMENDED CASE HANDLING GUIDELINES FOR INSURERS I. PREFACE Philosophy [Insurer] expects to work with the Firm and the insured to achieve the best result for the insured in

More information

Counsel must be fully familiar with the Uniform Civil Rules for the Supreme Court 22 NYCRR Part 202.

Counsel must be fully familiar with the Uniform Civil Rules for the Supreme Court 22 NYCRR Part 202. JUSTICE GERALD E. LOEHR, J.S.C. Rockland County Supreme Court 1 South Main Street New City, New York 10956 Courtroom 1 Tel: (845) 483-8343 Fax: (845) 708-7236 Staff Bruce J. Pearl, Principal Law Secretary

More information

Supreme Court Rule 201. General Discovery Provisions. (a) Discovery Methods.

Supreme Court Rule 201. General Discovery Provisions. (a) Discovery Methods. Supreme Court Rule 201. General Discovery Provisions (a) Discovery Methods. Information is obtainable as provided in these rules through any of the following discovery methods: depositions upon oral examination

More information

RULE 1. ASSIGNMENT OF CASES

RULE 1. ASSIGNMENT OF CASES LOCAL RULES FOR FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI [Renumbered and codified by order of the Supreme Court effective May 18, 2006; amended effective April 23, 2009.] RULE 1. ASSIGNMENT OF CASES

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PASCO AND PINELLAS COUNTIES, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 2013-064 PA/PI-CIR

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PASCO AND PINELLAS COUNTIES, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 2013-064 PA/PI-CIR IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PASCO AND PINELLAS COUNTIES, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 2013-064 PA/PI-CIR RE: PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCES Rule 1.200(c) of the Florida Rules of

More information

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE In the Matter of a ) Uniform Pretrial Order ) ) Administrative Order 3AO-03-04 (Amended) UNIFORM PRETRIAL ORDER In order

More information

Colorado s Civil Access Pilot Project and the Changing Landscape of Business Litigation

Colorado s Civil Access Pilot Project and the Changing Landscape of Business Litigation Colorado s Civil Access Pilot Project and the Changing Landscape of Business Litigation On January 1, 2012, new rules approved by the Colorado Supreme Court entitled the Civil Access Pilot Project ( CAPP

More information

A Practical Summary of the New Supreme Court Civil Rules for Clark Wilson LLP Insurance Clients

A Practical Summary of the New Supreme Court Civil Rules for Clark Wilson LLP Insurance Clients A Practical Summary of the New Supreme Court Civil Rules for Clark Wilson LLP Insurance Clients by: Jennifer Loeb Clark Wilson LLP tel. 604.891.7766 jrl@cwilson.com Edited by: Larry Munn Clark Wilson LLP

More information

Friday 31st October, 2008.

Friday 31st October, 2008. Friday 31st October, 2008. It is ordered that the Rules heretofore adopted and promulgated by this Court and now in effect be and they hereby are amended to become effective January 1, 2009. Amend Rules

More information

PART III Discovery. Overview of the Discovery Process CHAPTER 8 KEY POINTS THE NATURE OF DISCOVERY. Information is obtainable by one or more discovery

PART III Discovery. Overview of the Discovery Process CHAPTER 8 KEY POINTS THE NATURE OF DISCOVERY. Information is obtainable by one or more discovery PART III Discovery CHAPTER 8 Overview of the Discovery Process Generally, discovery is conducted freely by the parties without court intervention. Disclosure can be obtained through depositions, interrogatories,

More information

SUMMARY OF CHANGES COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION RULES

SUMMARY OF CHANGES COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION RULES SUMMARY OF CHANGES COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION RULES Amended and Effective October 1, 2013 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES: 1. Mediation R-9. Mediation: Mediation is increasingly relied upon and is an accepted part of

More information

Rules of the City of New York Title 61 - Office of Collective Bargaining Chapter 1 - Practice and Procedure

Rules of the City of New York Title 61 - Office of Collective Bargaining Chapter 1 - Practice and Procedure Rules of the City of New York Title 61 - Office of Collective Bargaining Chapter 1 - Practice and Procedure 1-01 Definitions 1-02 Representation Proceedings 1-03 Collective Bargaining 1-04 Mediation 1-05

More information

Hon. Maria S. Vazquez-Doles, J.S.C. Orange County Supreme Court 285 Main Street Goshen, NY 10924. Part Rules (Effective September 29, 2014)

Hon. Maria S. Vazquez-Doles, J.S.C. Orange County Supreme Court 285 Main Street Goshen, NY 10924. Part Rules (Effective September 29, 2014) Law Clerk: Jane Harrington Secretary: Allison Cappella Part Clerk: Trisha Rittenhouse Phone: (845)476-3449 Fax: (845) 476-3684 APPEARANCES Hon. Maria S. Vazquez-Doles, J.S.C. Orange County Supreme Court

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA ORDER NO. 1682. Pretrial Conferences; Scheduling; Management.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA ORDER NO. 1682. Pretrial Conferences; Scheduling; Management. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA ORDER NO. 1682 Amending Civil Rules 16, 26, 33, 34, 37, and 45 concerning Discovery of Electronic Information IT IS ORDERED: 1. Civil Rule 16 is amended to read

More information

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 14, 2015 california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS Misc. Docket No. 93-0141L APPROVAL OF LOCAL RULES OF CIVIL TRIAL OF THE 241ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF SMITH COUNTY ORDERED: Pursuant to Rule 3a of the Texas Rules of Civil

More information

SELECT SERVICES FLAT FEE REPRESENTATION AGREEMENT page 1 of 8

SELECT SERVICES FLAT FEE REPRESENTATION AGREEMENT page 1 of 8 Utah Family Law, LC Tel. No. 801-466-9277 E-mail: eric@divorceutah.com Attorney Eric K. Johnson - Attorney Russell W. Hartvigsen Mail: 2666 South 2000 East, Suite 101 Salt Lake City Utah 84109 REMEMBER:

More information

Personal Injury Litigation

Personal Injury Litigation Personal Injury Litigation The Anatomy of a New York Personal Injury Lawsuit An ebook by Stuart DiMartini, Esq. 1325 Sixth Avenue, 27 th Floor New York, NY 10019 212-5181532 dimartinilaw.com Introduction

More information

RULE 10 FUNDS HELD BY THE CLERK

RULE 10 FUNDS HELD BY THE CLERK RULE 10 FUNDS HELD BY THE CLERK 10.1 General. A Judge of the District Court may order that any monies in actions pending before the Court be invested in any local financial institution for safe keeping.

More information

Case 6:13-cv-01168-EFM-TJJ Document 157 Filed 06/26/15 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 6:13-cv-01168-EFM-TJJ Document 157 Filed 06/26/15 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Case 6:13-cv-01168-EFM-TJJ Document 157 Filed 06/26/15 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS CARGILL MEAT SOLUTIONS CORPORATION, v. Plaintiff, PREMIUM BEEF FEEDERS,

More information

PRETRIAL LITIGATION IN A NUTSHELL. R. LAWRENCE DESSEM Professor of Law University of Tennessee ST. PAUL, MINN. WEST PUBLISHING CO.

PRETRIAL LITIGATION IN A NUTSHELL. R. LAWRENCE DESSEM Professor of Law University of Tennessee ST. PAUL, MINN. WEST PUBLISHING CO. PRETRIAL LITIGATION IN A NUTSHELL By R. LAWRENCE DESSEM Professor of Law University of Tennessee ST. PAUL, MINN. WEST PUBLISHING CO. 1992 PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.. TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF STATUTES

More information

2013 Amendments to Local Rules and Invitation to Comment

2013 Amendments to Local Rules and Invitation to Comment 2013 Amendments to Local Rules and Invitation to Comment D.C.COLO.LCivR 1.1 D.C.COLO.LCivR 1.2 D.C.COLO.LCivR 3.1 D.C.COLO.LCivR 3.2 D.C.COLO.LCivR 3.3 D.C.COLO.LCivR 5.1 D.C.COLO.LCivR 5.2 D.C.COLO.LCivR

More information

SMALL CLAIMS RULES. (d) Record of Proceedings. A record shall be made of all small claims court proceedings.

SMALL CLAIMS RULES. (d) Record of Proceedings. A record shall be made of all small claims court proceedings. SMALL CLAIMS RULES Rule 501. Scope and Purpose (a) How Known and Cited. These rules for the small claims division for the county court are additions to C.R.C.P. and shall be known and cited as the Colorado

More information

LOCAL CIVIL RULES UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA. (with revisions through January 2012)

LOCAL CIVIL RULES UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA. (with revisions through January 2012) LOCAL CIVIL RULES for the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA (with revisions through January 2012) TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF LOCAL CIVIL RULES..................................

More information

Rule 26. General Provisions Governing Discovery.

Rule 26. General Provisions Governing Discovery. Published on Arkansas Judiciary (https://courts.arkansas.gov) Rule 26. General Provisions Governing Discovery. (a) Discovery Methods. Parties may obtain discovery by one or more of the following methods:

More information

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS JUVENILE COURT DEPARTMENT JUVENILE COURT RULES

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS JUVENILE COURT DEPARTMENT JUVENILE COURT RULES COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS JUVENILE COURT DEPARTMENT JUVENILE COURT RULES FOR THE CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN Rule 1. Scope of Rules These rules apply to all actions in the Juvenile Court Department

More information

FACT SHEET FOR JUDGE ORLANDO GARCIA

FACT SHEET FOR JUDGE ORLANDO GARCIA FACT SHEET FOR JUDGE ORLANDO GARCIA CIVIL CASES Contacting the Court 1. Who should be contacted regarding scheduling matters? Gail Johns, Courtroom Deputy, (210) 472-6550 Ext. 228 or Gail_Johns@txwd.uscourts.gov.

More information

Bylaws of the Lawyer-Client Fee Dispute Resolution Committee of the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association. Enacted November 18, 2015

Bylaws of the Lawyer-Client Fee Dispute Resolution Committee of the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association. Enacted November 18, 2015 Bylaws of the Lawyer-Client Fee Dispute Resolution Committee of the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association Enacted November 18, 2015 Preamble and Purpose 1.) Background. Under Rule V, Section 5 of the

More information

Personal injury claim" does not include a claim for compensatory benefits pursuant to worker s compensation or veterans benefits.

Personal injury claim does not include a claim for compensatory benefits pursuant to worker s compensation or veterans benefits. Wisconsin AB 19 (2013) (a) Personal injury claim" means any claim for damages, loss, indemnification, contribution, restitution or other relief, including punitive damages, that is related to bodily injury

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM RE: ) Supreme Court Case No. PRM 06-006 ) ) QMENDING PROMULGATION ORDER ) PROMULGATION ORDER NO. YO. 06-006-02 ON THE LOCAL RULES 06-006-10 DF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM )

More information

Compulsory Arbitration

Compulsory Arbitration Local Rule 1301 Scope. Compulsory Arbitration Local Rule 1301 Scope. (1) The following civil actions shall first be submitted to and heard by a Board of Arbitrators: (a) (b) (c) (d) Civil actions, proceedings

More information

Any civil action exempt from arbitration by action of a presiding judge under ORS 36.405.

Any civil action exempt from arbitration by action of a presiding judge under ORS 36.405. CHAPTER 13 Arbitration 13.010 APPLICATION OF CHAPTER (1) This UTCR chapter applies to arbitration under ORS 36.400 to 36.425 and Acts amendatory thereof but, except as therein provided, does not apply

More information

Key differences between federal practice and California practice

Key differences between federal practice and California practice Discovery and deposition practice in federal court Key differences between federal practice and California practice BY BRIAN J. MALLOY Federal law governs procedural matters for cases that are in federal

More information

Accounting and Related Services Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

Accounting and Related Services Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures Accounting and Related Services Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures Rules Amended and Effective February 1, 2015 Available online at adr.org/accounting Table of Contents Introduction.... 6 Standard

More information

Getting a Trial Date in Cowlitz County

Getting a Trial Date in Cowlitz County 9950EN 6/2015 Getting a Trial Date in Cowlitz County Is this publication for me? Yes, if You have a civil case in Cowlitz County Superior Court AND The respondent/defendant in the case has filed a response

More information

51ST LEGISLATURE - STATE OF NEW MEXICO - FIRST SESSION, 2013

51ST LEGISLATURE - STATE OF NEW MEXICO - FIRST SESSION, 2013 SENATE BILL 1ST LEGISLATURE - STATE OF NEW MEXICO - FIRST SESSION, INTRODUCED BY Joseph Cervantes 1 ENDORSED BY THE COURTS, CORRECTIONS AND JUSTICE COMMITTEE AN ACT RELATING TO CIVIL ACTIONS; CLARIFYING

More information

Case: 4:13-cv-02652-SL Doc #: 32 Filed: 09/02/14 1 of 10. PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case: 4:13-cv-02652-SL Doc #: 32 Filed: 09/02/14 1 of 10. PageID #: <pageid> UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION Case: 4:13-cv-02652-SL Doc #: 32 Filed: 09/02/14 1 of 10. PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION JERRY P. TAMARKIN, et al., ) CASE NO. 4:13cv2652 ) )

More information

FEDERAL PRACTICE. In some jurisdictions, understanding the December 1, 2006 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is only the first step.

FEDERAL PRACTICE. In some jurisdictions, understanding the December 1, 2006 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is only the first step. A BNA, INC. DIGITAL DISCOVERY & E-EVIDENCE! VOL. 7, NO. 11 232-235 REPORT NOVEMBER 1, 2007 Reproduced with permission from Digital Discovery & e-evidence, Vol. 7, No. 11, 11/01/2007, pp. 232-235. Copyright

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION: MIDDLESEX COUNTY DOCKET NO. L- IN RE: MIDDLESEX ASBESTOS LITIGATION CIVIL ACTION ASBESTOS LITIGATION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION: MIDDLESEX COUNTY DOCKET NO. L- IN RE: MIDDLESEX ASBESTOS LITIGATION CIVIL ACTION ASBESTOS LITIGATION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION: MIDDLESEX COUNTY DOCKET NO. L- IN RE: MIDDLESEX ASBESTOS LITIGATION CIVIL ACTION ASBESTOS LITIGATION GENERAL ORDER I. COMPLAINTS A. All complaints must: 1. Include

More information

HP0868, LD 1187, item 1, 123rd Maine State Legislature An Act To Recoup Health Care Funds through the Maine False Claims Act

HP0868, LD 1187, item 1, 123rd Maine State Legislature An Act To Recoup Health Care Funds through the Maine False Claims Act PLEASE NOTE: Legislative Information cannot perform research, provide legal advice, or interpret Maine law. For legal assistance, please contact a qualified attorney. Be it enacted by the People of the

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION EEOC versus BROWN & GROUP RETAIL, INC. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-06-3074 Memorandum and Order Regarding Discovery Motions,

More information

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and to add Chapter 6 (commencing with

More information

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2011 SESSION LAW 2011-199 HOUSE BILL 380

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2011 SESSION LAW 2011-199 HOUSE BILL 380 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2011 SESSION LAW 2011-199 HOUSE BILL 380 AN ACT TO CLARIFY THE PROCEDURE FOR DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION AND TO MAKE CONFORMING CHANGES TO

More information

FACT SHEET FOR JUDGE SAM SPARKS

FACT SHEET FOR JUDGE SAM SPARKS FACT SHEET FOR JUDGE SAM SPARKS CIVIL CASES Contacting the Court 1. Who should be contacted regarding scheduling matters? Contact Linda Mizell, Judicial Assistant, at (512) 916-5230, and/or the law clerk

More information

TRONOX TORT CLAIMS TRUST. Individual Review and Arbitration Procedures for Category A and Category D Personal Injury Claims

TRONOX TORT CLAIMS TRUST. Individual Review and Arbitration Procedures for Category A and Category D Personal Injury Claims TRONOX TORT CLAIMS TRUST Individual Review and Arbitration Procedures for Category A and Category D Personal Injury Claims Pursuant to Sections 3.4 and 3.5 of the Tronox Tort Claims Trust Distribution

More information

NOTICE TO THE ASBESTOS BAR

NOTICE TO THE ASBESTOS BAR NOTICE TO THE ASBESTOS BAR Please be advised that the Case Management Order for Asbestos-Related Personal Injury Claims and the Asbestos Summary Judgment Motion Procedures have been revised, effective

More information

International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution www.cpradr.org

International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution www.cpradr.org International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution www.cpradr.org ECONOMICAL LITIGATION AGREEMENTS ( ELA ) FOR COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS AS A MEANS OF REDUCING CIVIL LITIGATION COSTS THE MODEL CIVIL

More information

TITLE I REDUCTION OF ABUSIVE LITIGATION

TITLE I REDUCTION OF ABUSIVE LITIGATION 109 STAT. 737 Public Law 104 67 104th Congress An Act To reform Federal securities litigation, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America

More information

BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO PREHEARING INSTRUCTIONS

BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO PREHEARING INSTRUCTIONS BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO PREHEARING INSTRUCTIONS For the purpose of facilitating disciplinary hearings and related proceedings that are conducted pursuant to Rule V of

More information

I-2 FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS

I-2 FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS INTERNET RESOURCE Time Deadlines Federal Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure Contents I-1 Introduction I-2 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the United States District Courts I-3 Federal Rules of

More information

COMBUSTION ENGINEERING 524(g) ASBESTOS PI TRUST ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) PROCEDURES

COMBUSTION ENGINEERING 524(g) ASBESTOS PI TRUST ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) PROCEDURES COMBUSTION ENGINEERING 524(g) ASBESTOS PI TRUST ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) PROCEDURES Pursuant to Section 5.10 of the Combustion Engineering 524(g) Asbestos PI Trust Distribution Procedures (

More information

Responding to a Complaint: Ohio

Responding to a Complaint: Ohio View the online version at http://us.practicallaw.com/3-578-2986 Responding to a Complaint: Ohio SETH ALAN SCHWARTZ, DINSMORE & SHOHL, WITH PRACTICAL LAW LITIGATION A Q&A guide to responding to a complaint

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY PROBATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY PROBATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY PROBATE DIVISION Trial/Hearing Rules for Probate Judge: Mary Fingal Schulte, Supervising Judge Judge: Gerald Johnston Judge: Randall Sherman Clerks: Dept. L72, Mary Torrez

More information

MODEL DIRECTIONS FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES (2012) - before Master Roberts and Master Cook

MODEL DIRECTIONS FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES (2012) - before Master Roberts and Master Cook MODEL DIRECTIONS FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES (2012) - before Master Roberts and Master Cook Introductory note. These are the Model Directions for use in the first Case Management Conference in clinical

More information

Recommended Chapter Title and Rule. Current Montana Chapter Title and Rule V. DEPOSITIONS AND DISCOVERY V. DEPOSITIONS AND DISCOVERY

Recommended Chapter Title and Rule. Current Montana Chapter Title and Rule V. DEPOSITIONS AND DISCOVERY V. DEPOSITIONS AND DISCOVERY Current Montana Chapter Title and Rule V. DEPOSITIONS AND DISCOVERY RULE 26. GENERAL PROVISIONS GOVERNING DISCOVERY Recommended Chapter Title and Rule V. DEPOSITIONS AND DISCOVERY RULE 26. GENERAL PROVISIONS

More information

PRIVATE ATTORNEY SERVICES DIVISION OF RISK MANAGEMENT BUREAU OF CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION INTRODUCTION TO BILLING GUIDELINES

PRIVATE ATTORNEY SERVICES DIVISION OF RISK MANAGEMENT BUREAU OF CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION INTRODUCTION TO BILLING GUIDELINES PRIVATE ATTORNEY SERVICES DIVISION OF RISK MANAGEMENT BUREAU OF CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION INTRODUCTION TO BILLING GUIDELINES The Division of Risk Management, Bureau of Claims Administration, (Division) is

More information

Hong Kong High Court Procedure E-Discovery: Practice Direction Effective September 1, 2014

Hong Kong High Court Procedure E-Discovery: Practice Direction Effective September 1, 2014 CLIENT MEMORANDUM Hong Kong High Court Procedure E-Discovery: Practice Direction Effective September 1, 2014 August 28, 2014 Mandatory application of e-discovery Mandatory application of e-discovery to

More information

Section 2 Day Forward Major Jury Program

Section 2 Day Forward Major Jury Program Section 2 Day Forward Major Jury Program 1 DAY FORWARD/MAJOR JURY PROGRAM The Day Forward/Major Jury Program encompasses all Major Civil Jury cases except Commerce and Mass Tort cases. Day Forward Case

More information

CIVIL TRIAL RULES. of the COURTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, TEXAS. Table of Contents GENERAL MATTERS. Rule 1.10 Time Standards for the Disposition of Cases...

CIVIL TRIAL RULES. of the COURTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, TEXAS. Table of Contents GENERAL MATTERS. Rule 1.10 Time Standards for the Disposition of Cases... CIVIL TRIAL RULES of the COURTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, TEXAS Table of Contents GENERAL MATTERS Addendum to Local Rules Rule 1.10 Time Standards for the Disposition of Cases...2 Rule 1.11 Annual Calendar...3

More information

Rule 60A - Child and Adult Protection

Rule 60A - Child and Adult Protection Rule 60A - Child and Adult Protection Scope of Rule 60A 60A.01(1) This Rule is divided into four parts and it provides procedure for each of the following: (c) (d) protection of a child, and other purposes,

More information

JUDICIAL BRANCH MEMORANDUM. Re: New Hampshire Superior Court Civil Rules Effective October 1, 2013

JUDICIAL BRANCH MEMORANDUM. Re: New Hampshire Superior Court Civil Rules Effective October 1, 2013 JUDICIAL BRANCH MEMORANDUM To: Attorneys; Legal Assistants; Litigants From: Patricia A. Lenz, Superior Court Administrator Julie W. Howard, Strafford Superior Court Clerk Date: Updated December 16, 2013

More information

CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND CIVIL DIFFERENTIATED CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN

CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND CIVIL DIFFERENTIATED CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND CIVIL DIFFERENTIATED CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN FIRST EDITION: 1994 REVISED: JULY 2010 CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND CIVIL NON DOMESTIC DIFFERENTIATED

More information

ORDER I. COURT ADMINISTRATION

ORDER I. COURT ADMINISTRATION IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, BLOUNT COUNTY, TENNESSEE, DIVISIONS I AND II AND FOR THE CHANCERY COURT FOR BLOUNT COUNTY, TENNESSEE (BLOUNT COUNTY, CASES ONLY) ORDER PURSUANT TO

More information

Subchapter 2.400 Pretrial Procedure; Alternative Dispute Resolution; Offers of Judgment; Settlements

Subchapter 2.400 Pretrial Procedure; Alternative Dispute Resolution; Offers of Judgment; Settlements Subchapter 2.400 Pretrial Procedure; Alternative Dispute Resolution; Offers of Judgment; Settlements Rule 2.401 Pretrial Procedures; Conferences; Scheduling Orders (A) Time; Discretion of Court. At any

More information

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS THE TRIAL COURT STANDING ORDER NO. 2-86 (AMENDED)

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS THE TRIAL COURT STANDING ORDER NO. 2-86 (AMENDED) COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS THE TRIAL COURT SUFFOLK, ss. SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT STANDING ORDER NO. 2-86 (AMENDED) Applicable to All Counties to cases initiated by indictment on or after September

More information

IN RE: SKECHERS TONING SHOE : CASE: 3:11-md-02308-TBR PRODUCT LIABILITY LITIGATION : : MDL No.: 2308

IN RE: SKECHERS TONING SHOE : CASE: 3:11-md-02308-TBR PRODUCT LIABILITY LITIGATION : : MDL No.: 2308 Case 3:11-md-02308-TBR-LLK Document 68 Filed 05/03/12 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 1322 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTIRCT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION IN RE: SKECHERS TONING SHOE : CASE: 3:11-md-02308-TBR

More information

Small Claims: The Process in Detail

Small Claims: The Process in Detail What is a small claims division? Every justice court in Arizona has a small claims division to provide an inexpensive and speedy method for resolving most civil disputes that do not exceed $2,500. All

More information

The Judges of the Fulton Superior Court hereby create a "Business Case Division" (hereinafter referred to as the "Division").

The Judges of the Fulton Superior Court hereby create a Business Case Division (hereinafter referred to as the Division). SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA Atlanta October 11, 2012 The Honorable Supreme Court met pursuant to adjournment. The following order was passed: It is ordered that Paragraph 5 of Atlanta Judicial Circuit Rule

More information

ORDER. This matter is before the Court, en banc, on the motion to adopt the Rule For Expedited

ORDER. This matter is before the Court, en banc, on the motion to adopt the Rule For Expedited Serial: 149640 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No. 89-R-99025-SCT IN RE: UNIFORM RULES OF CIRCUIT AND COUNTY COURT PRACTICE ORDER This matter is before the Court, en banc, on the motion to adopt the

More information

MEDIATION PROCEDURES FOR RESOLVING BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS DISPUTES

MEDIATION PROCEDURES FOR RESOLVING BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS DISPUTES 6465 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 470 Minneapolis, MN 55426 Phone: 800-474-2371 Fax: 952-345-1160 www.adrforum.com MEDIATION PROCEDURES FOR RESOLVING BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS DISPUTES July 11, 2014 1 FORUM Request

More information

CIVIL PROCEDURE 101. Presentation by: Judge Emily Peacock, Scott Silverman, Esq. and Loren Beer, Esq.

CIVIL PROCEDURE 101. Presentation by: Judge Emily Peacock, Scott Silverman, Esq. and Loren Beer, Esq. CIVIL PROCEDURE 101 Presentation by: Judge Emily Peacock, Scott Silverman, Esq. and Loren Beer, Esq. The Federal Rules govern the conduct of all civil actions brought in Federal district courts. The Florida

More information

BILL ANALYSIS. C.S.S.B. 1309 By: Wentworth Civil Practices Committee Report (Substituted) BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

BILL ANALYSIS. C.S.S.B. 1309 By: Wentworth Civil Practices Committee Report (Substituted) BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE BILL ANALYSIS C.S.S.B. 1309 By: Wentworth Civil Practices Committee Report (Substituted) BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE C.S.S.B. 1309 gives the State of Texas civil remedies to be invoked by the attorney general

More information

Consensus of Judges on Multnomah County Court Foreclosure Panel

Consensus of Judges on Multnomah County Court Foreclosure Panel Consensus of Judges on Multnomah County Court Foreclosure Panel The judges who serve on the Multnomah County Court s Foreclosure Panel have been presented with the following recurring issues, which over

More information

Rule 6 Adopted at a joint meeting of the District and County Court at Law Judges of Webb County on December 2, 2009

Rule 6 Adopted at a joint meeting of the District and County Court at Law Judges of Webb County on December 2, 2009 Rule 6 Adopted at a joint meeting of the District and County Court at Law Judges of Webb County on December 2, 2009 Committee Members Pete Garza Hugo Martinez Richard Gonzalez Fernando Sanchez Eduardo

More information

Milwaukee Bar Association Fee Arbitration

Milwaukee Bar Association Fee Arbitration Milwaukee Bar Association Fee Arbitration Attached are the Rules for the arbitration of fee disputes on behalf of the Milwaukee Bar Association. In consideration of the arbitration services to be rendered,

More information

ASARCO ASBESTOS PERSONAL INJURY SETTLEMENT TRUST ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES

ASARCO ASBESTOS PERSONAL INJURY SETTLEMENT TRUST ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES ASARCO ASBESTOS PERSONAL INJURY SETTLEMENT TRUST ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES ASARCO Asbestos Personal Injury Settlement Trust ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES Pursuant to Section

More information

LOCAL RULES of THE CIVIL COURTS OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS -- including revisions approved by the Texas Supreme Court 12/7/05

LOCAL RULES of THE CIVIL COURTS OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS -- including revisions approved by the Texas Supreme Court 12/7/05 LOCAL RULES of THE CIVIL COURTS OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS -- including revisions approved by the Texas Supreme Court 12/7/05 PART I - FILING, ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFER 1.01. RANDOM ASSIGNMENT 1.02. COLLATERAL

More information

What to Expect In Your Lawsuit

What to Expect In Your Lawsuit What to Expect In Your Lawsuit A lawsuit is a marathon not a sprint. Stewart R. Albertson. There is a saying that the wheels of justice move slowly. That is as true today as when it was initially stated.

More information

: : before this court (the Court Annexed Mediation Program ); and

: : before this court (the Court Annexed Mediation Program ); and UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In re: ADOPTION OF PROCEDURES GOVERNING : MEDIATION OF MATTERS AND THE

More information

Federal Rule Changes Affecting E-Discovery Are Almost Here - Are You Ready This Time?

Federal Rule Changes Affecting E-Discovery Are Almost Here - Are You Ready This Time? Federal Rule Changes Affecting E-Discovery Are Almost Here - Are You Ready This Time? An Overview of the Rules, History and Commentary Absent congressional action to reject, modify or defer proposed amendments

More information

Computing and Extending Time; Time. The following rules apply in

Computing and Extending Time; Time. The following rules apply in AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Rule 6. Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers (a) Computing Time. The following rules apply in computing any time period specified in these

More information

LOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 7 FAMILY LAW

LOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 7 FAMILY LAW DIVISION 7 FAMILY LAW Rule Effective 700. Subject Matter of the Family Law Court 07/01/2011 700.5 Attorneys and Self Represented Parties 07/01/2011 700.6 Family Law Filings 01/01/2012 701. Assignment of

More information

Table of Contents. LR 3.1 Filing Complaint by Electronic Means... 2. LR 3.2 Filing Complaint on Paper... 2

Table of Contents. LR 3.1 Filing Complaint by Electronic Means... 2. LR 3.2 Filing Complaint on Paper... 2 LOCAL CIVIL RULES Table of Contents LR 1.1 Definitions.................................................... 1 (a) Court........................................................ 1 (b) Presiding Judge................................................

More information

CIVIL APPEALS DOCKETING STATEMENT INSTRUCTIONS

CIVIL APPEALS DOCKETING STATEMENT INSTRUCTIONS IN THE Court of Appeals STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE CIVIL APPEALS DOCKETING STATEMENT INSTRUCTIONS Arizona Rule of Civil Appellate Procedure 12(e) requires an appellant to file a civil appeals docketing

More information

STANDARD 3.5 ON ASSISTANCE TO PRO SE LITIGANTS

STANDARD 3.5 ON ASSISTANCE TO PRO SE LITIGANTS STANDARD 3.5 ON ASSISTANCE TO PRO SE LITIGANTS STANDARD In appropriate circumstances, a provider may offer pro se litigants assistance or limited representation at various stages of proceedings. COMMENTARY

More information

CALIFORNIA FALSE CLAIMS ACT GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 12650-12656

CALIFORNIA FALSE CLAIMS ACT GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 12650-12656 CALIFORNIA FALSE CLAIMS ACT GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 12650-12656 12650. (a) This article shall be known and may be cited as the False Claims Act. (b) For purposes of this article: (1) "Claim" includes any

More information

BUSINESS COURT PROCEDURES FOR THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA

BUSINESS COURT PROCEDURES FOR THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA BUSINESS COURT PROCEDURES FOR THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA SECTION 1 PHILOSOPHY, SCOPE AND GOALS 1.1 - Citation to Procedures 1.2 - Purpose and Scope 1.3 - Goals

More information

PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT NEATLY MAKING SURE ALL WRITING IS CLEAR AND LEGIBILE ON EACH COPY

PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT NEATLY MAKING SURE ALL WRITING IS CLEAR AND LEGIBILE ON EACH COPY INSTRUCTIONS: PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT NEATLY MAKING SURE ALL WRITING IS CLEAR AND LEGIBILE ON EACH COPY If the parties submit this form 3 business days prior to the scheduled preliminary conference date,

More information

VII. JUDGMENT RULE 54. JUDGMENTS; COSTS

VII. JUDGMENT RULE 54. JUDGMENTS; COSTS VII. JUDGMENT RULE 54. JUDGMENTS; COSTS (a) Definition; Form. Judgment as used in these rules includes a decree and any order from which an appeal lies. A judgment shall not contain a recital of pleadings

More information

Proposals for Settlement: How to draft ones that will stick and how to deal with them when they land on your desk By Ellen K. Lyons and Gary M.

Proposals for Settlement: How to draft ones that will stick and how to deal with them when they land on your desk By Ellen K. Lyons and Gary M. Proposals for Settlement: How to draft ones that will stick and how to deal with them when they land on your desk By Ellen K. Lyons and Gary M. Pappas Originally presented May 2006, but information is

More information