Federal Bar Update: John Maley

Federal Bar Update: Southern District's uniform protective order

January 28, 2015
John Maley
Throughout 2014, a subcommittee of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana’s Local Rules Committee, including Magistrate Judges Denise LaRue and Debra McVicker Lynch, was hard at work on a proposed uniform protective order.
More

Federal Bar Update: Minor rule changes and attorney-client privilege

October 22, 2014
John Maley
Any amendments to various federal rules always take effect Dec. 1. Some years there are significant changes, other years few or no amendments are in play. This December is very modest in terms of federal rule amendments.
More

Federal Bar Update: Proposed rule changes, redacting documents

August 27, 2014
John Maley
The Judicial Conference Advisory Committees on Civil Rules has published proposed amendments to several rules and is seeking public comment.
More

Federal Bar Update: Free CLE, hyperlinks and award nominations

May 7, 2014
John Maley
As noted previously, a new pilot program was underway in the Southern District of Indiana for including hyperlinks in briefs.
More

Federal Bar Update: ND requires e-filing; SD launches hyperlink pilot

March 12, 2014
John Maley
Effective Feb. 24, all new complaints and removals in the Northern District of Indiana must be e-filed.
More

Federal Bar Update: Court launches new website, case management plan

January 15, 2014
John Maley
The Southern District’s website is revamped, with a new and improved look and feel. The case opinion search feature remains and allows searching by judge and/or date. It can be a useful tool to get recent standards, for instance, on common issues.
More

Federal Bar Update: Rule 45 amendments on subpoenas took effect Dec. 1

December 18, 2013
John Maley
Amendments took effect Dec. 1 to Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Also, amendments took effect to several of the Southern District of Indiana’s Local Rules.
More

Federal Bar Update: Rule requires advance service of non-party document requests

October 23, 2013
John Maley
Unknown to some practitioners, since 1991 the current version of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 requires advance notice to opposing parties of document subpoenas issued to non-parties.
More

Federal Bar Update: Southern District starts pilot program for employment cases

July 3, 2013
John Maley
The Southern District of Indiana has been experimenting this year with a pilot program for certain employment cases. The only eligible cases are individual Title VII, ADA and ADEA actions.
More

Federal Bar Update: Supreme Court takes rare steps on procedural decisions

May 8, 2013
John Maley
With its limited docket, the U.S. Supreme Court rarely decides procedural issues, focusing instead on weighty constitutional issues or resolving split interpretations of federal statutes. This term, however, the Supreme Court has addressed several procedural issues.
More

Federal Bar Update: Pilot program for discovery in employment cases

March 27, 2013
John Maley
In the Southern District of Indiana, if you are litigating an adverse-action employment case you might be part of a pilot program that aims to streamline and tailor discovery and scheduling.
More

Federal Bar Update: Southern District of Indiana adopts rule amendments

January 16, 2013
John Maley
The Southern District has amended several Local Rules. These were approved in late December and took effect Jan. 1.
More

Federal Bar Update: Rule changes, 7th Circuit procedural decisions

December 19, 2012
John Maley
As federal practitioners know, each Dec. 1 new federal rule amendments take effect. In most recent years there have been significant changes to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure each December.
More

Federal Bar Update: Northern, Southern District courts cleaning up local rules

November 7, 2012
John Maley
Local Rule amendments are in the works in the Northern District and Southern District of Indiana, with amendments to take effect Jan. 1.
More

Federal Bar Update: Opinion provides insight on attorney fees in FDCPA cases

September 12, 2012
John Maley
Federal courts routinely determine fee petitions for prevailing parties in various fee-shifting cases. A recent opinion from Magistrate Judge Denise LaRue illustrates guiding principles here.
More

Federal Bar Update: No changes to federal rules this year

August 1, 2012
John Maley
Federal rule amendments take affect Dec. 1 of each year after a lengthy, time-consuming process of transmittal from the Judicial Conference to the Supreme Court and then to Congress. This coming December, for the first time in many years, there are no amendments on the horizon for the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, or Federal Rules of Evidence.
More

Federal Bar Update: 6-month update on changes to removal statutes

June 6, 2012
John Maley
As readers will recall, the Federal Courts Jurisdiction and Venue Clarification Act of 2011 took effect Jan. 6. Since the act took effect, it has been cited by name in 13 reported decisions, most of which simply deal with the effective date of the act.
More

Federal Bar Update: Uniform Case Management Plan changes

April 11, 2012
John Maley
The Southern District of Indiana recently modified two sections of the court’s Uniform Case Management Plan regarding experts.
More

Federal Bar Update: Removal and venue changes now in effect

January 18, 2012
John Maley
Maley writes about the Federal Courts Jurisdiction and Venue Clarification Act of 2011.
More

Federal Bar Update: Removal and venue changes are on the horizon

December 21, 2011
John Maley
With the recent passage of the Federal Courts Jurisdiction and Venue Clarification Act of 2011, key statutory changes to removal and venue are on the horizon.
More

Federal Bar Update: Comments sought for changes to local rules

November 9, 2011
John Maley
John Maley writes about changes coming to local rules in each District Court.
More

Federal Bar Update: Comments accepted on Rule 45 amendments

September 14, 2011
John Maley
John Maley discusses proposed rule amendments and a study on 12(b)(6) motions.
More

Editorial: Personal jurisdiction theories still evolving

August 3, 2011
John Maley
As most litigators know, in Asahi Metal v. Superior Court of Cal., 480 U.S. 102 (1987), a plurality of the Supreme Court embraced the stream-of-commerce theory of personal jurisdiction, which generally holds that if a manufacturer or distributor has sufficient knowledge and control of its distribution system, it can be sued in a state in which its products cause injury. Since Asahi Metal, the theory has evolved somewhat in federal and state appellate courts but had not been revisited by the Supreme Court.
More

Federal Bar Update: Avoid multiple summary judgment motions

June 8, 2011
John Maley
The Southern District of Indiana has amended its Uniform Case Management Plan to include new language regarding summary judgment motions.
More

Federal Bar Update: Confidentiality not always enforceable

April 13, 2011
John Maley
As federal practitioners know, the 7th Circuit is particularly strict about protecting public access to federal court filings.
More
Page  1 2 >> pager
Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. All the lawyers involved in this don't add up to a hill of beans; mostly yes-men punching their tickets for future advancement. REMF types. Window dressing. Who in this mess was a real hero? the whistleblower that let the public know about the torture, whom the US sent to Jail. John Kyriakou. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/26/us/ex-officer-for-cia-is-sentenced-in-leak-case.html?_r=0 Now, considering that Torture is Illegal, considering that during Vietnam a soldier was court-martialed and imprisoned for waterboarding, why has the whistleblower gone to jail but none of the torturers have been held to account? It's amazing that Uncle Sam's sunk lower than Vietnam. But that's where we're at. An even more unjust and pointless war conducted in an even more bogus manner. this from npr: "On Jan. 21, 1968, The Washington Post ran a front-page photo of a U.S. soldier supervising the waterboarding of a captured North Vietnamese soldier. The caption said the technique induced "a flooding sense of suffocation and drowning, meant to make him talk." The picture led to an Army investigation and, two months later, the court martial of the soldier." Today, the US itself has become lawless.

  2. "Brain Damage" alright.... The lunatic is on the grass/ The lunatic is on the grass/ Remembering games and daisy chains and laughs/ Got to keep the loonies on the path.... The lunatic is in the hall/ The lunatics are in my hall/ The paper holds their folded faces to the floor/ And every day the paper boy brings more/ And if the dam breaks open many years too soon/ And if there is no room upon the hill/ And if your head explodes with dark forbodings too/ I'll see you on the dark side of the moon!!!

  3. It is amazing how selectively courts can read cases and how two very similar factpatterns can result in quite different renderings. I cited this very same argument in Brown v. Bowman, lost. I guess it is panel, panel, panel when one is on appeal. Sad thing is, I had Sykes. Same argument, she went the opposite. Her Rooker-Feldman jurisprudence is now decidedly unintelligible.

  4. November, 2014, I was charged with OWI/Endangering a person. I was not given a Breathalyzer test and the arresting officer did not believe that alcohol was in any way involved. I was self-overmedicated with prescription medications. I was taken to local hospital for blood draw to be sent to State Tox Lab. My attorney gave me a cookie-cutter plea which amounts to an ALCOHOL-related charge. Totally unacceptable!! HOW can I get my TOX report from the state lab???

  5. My mother got temporary guardianship of my children in 2012. my husband and I got divorced 2015 the judge ordered me to have full custody of all my children. Does this mean the temporary guardianship is over? I'm confused because my divorce papers say I have custody and he gets visits and i get to claim the kids every year on my taxes. So just wondered since I have in black and white that I have custody if I can go get my kids from my moms and not go to jail?

ADVERTISEMENT