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.
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.
John Maley takes a look at rule changes in federal courts and reminds attorneys that the rule on Statement of the Facts has been deleted.
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.
The Judicial Conference Advisory Committees on Civil Rules has published proposed amendments to several rules and is seeking public comment.
One of the most useful tools in discovery is the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition, allowing a party to depose an entity, which must then produce one or more witnesses to testify to enumerated topics.
As noted previously, a new pilot program was underway in the Southern District of Indiana for including hyperlinks in briefs.
Effective Feb. 24, all new complaints and removals in the Northern District of Indiana must be e-filed.
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.
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.
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.
Effective Aug. 14, the Northern District of Indiana has a new form for the “Report of Parties’ Planning Meeting” that is required to be submitted after the parties’ Rule 26(f) planning conference. This new form is to be used going forward.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The Southern District has amended several Local Rules. These were approved in late December and took effect Jan. 1.
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.
Local Rule amendments are in the works in the Northern District and Southern District of Indiana, with amendments to take effect Jan. 1.
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.