Maley: Updated series is valuable for practitioners

John Maley
February 27, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Commentary

maley-john-mugNew013013By John R. Maley

As the practice has moved from law-firm libraries to online research on laptops and iPads, there remains a place for comprehensive, in-depth and practical treatises and practice guides. Since 1998, Westlaw’s Business and Commercial Litigation in Federal Courts has been just such a valuable resource, and it continues to include electronic materials on a CD that contains jury instructions, forms and checklists that are in the 11-volume printed set. The series is unique in that it is a collaborative effort between Westlaw and the ABA’s Section of Litigation, with all proceeds going to that section.

The first edition in 1998 had six comprehensive volumes, expanded to eight volumes in the second edition in 2005. The new third edition has grown to eleven volumes with 34 new chapters. Under the guidance of New York litigator Robert Haig, 251 different distinguished authors – including 22


distinguished federal judges from the appellate and District courts – contributed to the series. One of the authors remains Indiana’s own Hon. William C. Lee, who penned the chapter on scheduling and pretrial conferences and orders.

Although there are other treatises addressing federal civil practice, none are written specifically for commercial litigation. Moreover, no other book gives integra

ted treatment to procedural and substantive law in areas frequently encountered by federal commercial litigators. Furthermore, the authors address practical perspectives and tips for plaintiff and defense alike for all stages of litigation, including trial.

For the young practitioner, the treatise is a tremendous starting point for virtually any procedural and substantive issue that crosses the desk. On the procedural front, for instance, topics addressed range from subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, venue, immunity, investigation, case evaluation, pleadings, discovery, motions practice, trial, appeals, and enforcement of judgments. Meanwhile, on the substantive front, the coverage is broad but in-depth, ranging from antitrust, securities, banking, consumer, employment, copyright, franchising, entertainment, environmental, energy, construction, patent, trademark, products, and false claims.

For the experienced litigator, the treatise is both a good refresher and ready-reference, as well as a fine starting point for supporting authority and research given the detailed footnotes with multiple citations (actually more than 40,000 cites).

As is evident from this third edition and the strength and depth of the organizations and authors involved, this was not a “one and done” effort. Instead, the treatise has been supplemented with pocket parts annually since its initial publication, so it stays current with changes in statutory amendments, rule changes, evolving case law, and evolutions in federal practice.

For lawyers or firms with federal commercial litigation practices, this series is worth serious consideration. The eleven volumes and CD sell for $1,351 from Westlaw.•


John Maley – – is a partner with Barnes & Thornburg LLP in Indianapolis, focusing on litigation, employment, and appellate practice. The opinions expressed are those of the author.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I have an open CHINS case I failed a urine screen I have since got clean completed IOP classes now in after care passed home inspection my x sister in law has my children I still don't even have unsupervised when I have been clean for over 4 months my x sister wants to keep the lids for good n has my case working with her I just discovered n have proof that at one of my hearing dcs case worker stated in court to the judge that a screen was dirty which caused me not to have unsupervised this was at the beginning two weeks after my initial screen I thought the weed could have still been in my system was upset because they were suppose to check levels n see if it was going down since this was only a few weeks after initial instead they said dirty I recently requested all of my screens from redwood because I take prescriptions that will show up n I was having my doctor look at levels to verify that matched what I was prescripted because dcs case worker accused me of abuseing when I got my screens I found out that screen I took that dcs case worker stated in court to judge that caused me to not get granted unsupervised was actually negative what can I do about this this is a serious issue saying a parent failed a screen in court to judge when they didn't please advise

  2. I have a degree at law, recent MS in regulatory studies. Licensed in KS, admitted b4 S& 7th circuit, but not to Indiana bar due to political correctness. Blacklisted, nearly unemployable due to hostile state action. Big Idea: Headwinds can overcome, esp for those not within the contours of the bell curve, the Lego Movie happiness set forth above. That said, even without the blacklisting for holding ideas unacceptable to the Glorious State, I think the idea presented above that a law degree open many vistas other than being a galley slave to elitist lawyers is pretty much laughable. (Did the law professors of Indiana pay for this to be published?)

  3. Paul Hartman of Burbank, Oh who is helping Sister Fuller with this Con Artist Kevin Bart McCarthy scares Sister Joseph Therese, Patricia Ann Fuller very much that McCarthy will try and hurt Patricia Ann Fuller and Paul Hartman of Burbank, Oh or any member of his family. Sister is very, very scared, (YES, I AM) This McCarthy guy is a real, real CON MAN and crook. I try to totall flatter Kevin Bart McCARTHY to keep him from hurting my best friends in this world which are Carolyn Rose and Paul Hartman. I Live in total fear of this man Kevin Bart McCarthy and try to praise him as a good man to keep us ALL from his bad deeds. This man could easy have some one cause us a very bad disability. You have to PRAISAE in order TO PROTECT yourself. He lies and makes up stories about people and then tries to steal if THEY OWN THRU THE COURTS A SPECIAL DEVOTION TO PROTECT, EX> Our Lady of America DEVOTION. EVERYONE who reads this, PLEASE BE CAREFUL of Kevin Bart McCarthy of Indianapolis, IN My Phone No. IS 419-435-3838.

  4. Joe, you might want to do some reading on the fate of Hoosier whistleblowers before you get your expectations raised up.

  5. I had a hospital and dcs caseworker falsify reports that my child was born with drugs in her system. I filed a complaint with the Indiana department of health....and they found that the hospital falsified drug screens in their investigation. Then I filed a complaint with human health services in Washington DC...dcs drug Testing is unregulated and is indicating false positives...they are currently being investigated by human health services. Then I located an attorney and signed contracts one month ago to sue dcs and Anderson community hospital. Once the suit is filed I am taking out a loan against the suit and paying a law firm to file a writ of mandamus challenging the courts jurisdiction to invoke chins case against me. I also forwarded evidence to a u.s. senator who contacted hhs to push an investigation faster. Once the lawsuit is filed local news stations will be running coverage on the situation. Easy day....people will be losing their jobs soon...and judge pancol...who has attempted to cover up what has happened will also be in trouble. The drug testing is a kids for cash and federal funding situation.