Rule 30(b)(6) requires organizations such as corporations, associations and government agencies to designate people to testify on their behalf about specific matters raised in litigation. The Advisory Committee on Civil Rules has received frequent complaints about the problems with Rule 30(b)(6) since its inception. Members of the ABA Section of Litigation Federal Practice Task Force convinced the Committee to revisit this important topic in April 2016. Since then, practitioners presented the Rule 30(b)(6) Subcommittee with roughly a dozen meaningful reforms that would have improved practice under the rule by fixing what’s broken. The proposed amendment published in August of 2018 incorporates none of them. Please see the proposed amendment below.
LCJ believes that the proposed amendment would not only fail to improve the rule but also make a failing rule worse. LCJ has asked the Committee to reevaluate the best of those improvements and draft a different amendment. Please take a moment to review the full comment explaining LCJ's concerns by clicking on the below link:
LCJ Comment to the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules Entitled "FIXING WHAT’S BROKEN: A CALL FOR STRAIGHTFORWARD ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS THAT REGULARLY CONFOUND RULE 30(b)(6) PRACTICE"
See why 138 companies believe the proposed amendment will open the door to gamesmanship and mini trials over witness selection by clicking below.
Below is a comment submitted by LCJ to the Civil Rules Advisory Committee concerning the Rule 30(b)(6) Subcommittee’s proposed alternatives for an amendment to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6) on March 25, 2019.
how to engage in THE rule 30(B)(6)
lcj member filings
Our fellow Defense Bar Organizations submitted the below linked comments on the proposed amendment.