Federal Bar Update: John Maley

Federal Bar Update: Removing state-court actions to federal court

June 3, 2015
John Maley
Removal of state-court actions to federal court has provided a seemingly never-ending source of procedural disputes. Fortunately many of those mind-numbing issues have been resolved in the last several years by Congress and the courts, with the Supreme Court of the United States addressing one key issue recently.
More

Federal Bar Update: Recent federal opinions address recurring discovery issues

March 25, 2015
John Maley
In recent months several opinions from Indiana federal judges have addressed recurring issues in discovery.
More

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
Page  1 2 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  2. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  3. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  4. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

  5. "No one is safe when the Legislature is in session."

ADVERTISEMENT