award winning advocacy
LCJ has helped to streamline rules in our civil justice system that waste businesses’ time and resources and has been honored by the Institute of Legal Reform at the U.S. Chamber for its success reforming current rules that require businesses of all sizes to retain massive amounts of information irrelevant to their cases.
The position papers hyperlinked below illustrate the scope and depth of recent LCJ rule making campaigns that laid the foundation for the recent discovery reforms related to scope, preservation and costs. The formal comments, combined with the face-to-face testimony and interaction of LCJ members at various hearings and additional support provided by leading legal scholars and academics, provides compelling reasons for judges, Members of Congress and rule makers to give serious consideration to fundamental rule reform.
The position papers hyperlinked below illustrate the scope and depth of recent LCJ rule making campaigns that laid the foundation for the recent discovery reforms related to scope, preservation and costs. The formal comments, combined with the face-to-face testimony and interaction of LCJ members at various hearings and additional support provided by leading legal scholars and academics, provides compelling reasons for judges, Members of Congress and rule makers to give serious consideration to fundamental rule reform.
INITIATIVES
RULES FOR MDLSAlthough MDLs were designed to be efficient mechanisms for coordinating pretrial discovery and motions, in many instances they have become one-sided forums for settlement pressure. LCJ advocates for FRCP amendments that would help balance the process by bringing the same transparency and guardrails the rules provide in non-MDL cases.
"Requester pays" discovery rulesLCJ supports rules that require parties to pay some or all of the expenses incurred to comply with their discovery requests. Such a rule would permit parties to access information that will enable fact finders to determine the outcome of civil litigation – while aligning well-proven economic incentives with the reality of modern litigation.
|
Fix and follow federal rule of evidence 702LCJ advocates for an amendment to Rule 702 that would encourage judges to be effective “gatekeepers,” allowing only admissible expert evidence to be presented to the finder of fact.
modernize privilege log requirementsLCJ advocates for reform of privilege log practices to end the requirement for “document-by-document” logs when alternatives such as categorical logging would be more cost efficient..
|
AMICUS BRIEFSLCJ files amicus briefs focused on key questions within our unique area of expertise in procedural rules. When most people hear the word “amicus,” they think trial court proceedings are over – but not LCJ. We apply our expertise wherever needed, including discovery disputes in trial courts.
protect the right to seal proprietary and confidential informationLCJ works to protect litigants’ ability to file documents under seal, which is under attack by free press advocates who are proposing a new rule to the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules that would end the practice of stipulated sealing orders and make it overly difficult for courts to seal proprietary information.
|
"I have been particularly impressed with LCJ's network of defense bar leaders who are not afraid to take on the plaintiffs' bar in both the legislative and judicial arenas."
- michael harrington, sr. vice president and general counsel eli lilly
Resources
- LCJ Highlights Need for Review of Rule 23 to Curtail Abusive Consumer Class Action Cases
- The Need for FRCP Amendments Concerning Multi-District Litigation (MDL) Cases
- LCJ Comment to the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules - Thoughts on the Note to the Proposed Rule 37(e), 042514
- LCJ Comment to the Advisory Committee, Final Modifications Necessary, 040414
- LCJ Supplementary Comment to the Advisory Committee, 020314
- LCJ Public Comment to the Advisory Committee, 083013
- LCJ Comment, A Meaningful Step, 040113
- LCJ Comment, The Un-American Rule, 040113
- LCJ Comment, No Fault Exception, 021113
- LCJ Comment, FRCP 37(e) and Other Proposals, 122712
- LCJ Comment, A Meaningful Package of Amendments, 103012
- LCJ Comment, Current Duke Subcommittee Sketches, 103112
- Cortese, EDI Article - New Rules Will Reduce Costs, 101812
- LCJ General Counsels Letter, 100512
- LCJ Draft FRCP Duke MiniConf Questions & Answers, 100212
- LCJ FRCP Duke Sketch Sedona State Farm Response Letter, 100112
- Draft Proposed Amendments, FRCP 26 and 37 Discovery Costs Preservation, 090812
- Questions, FRCP Duke Miniconference, 090512
- LCJ Comment Letter, Duke Subcommittee Proposals, 060412
- LCJ Comment, Duke Subcommittee Proposals, 060512
- LCJ Comment, New Standards Summary Views, 043012
- LCJ Comment, New Standards, 031512
- LCJ Comment, FRCP 45, 010512
- LCJ Statement, Congressional Hearing on Discovery, 121311
- LCJ Comment, The Time is Now, 103111
- LCJ Comment, Stronger Discovery Medicine, 081811
- Memorandum, Preservation/Sanctions Issues for Preservation Mini-Conference 062911
- LCJ Comment, Preservation – Moving the Paradigm to Rule Text, to Civil Rules Advisory Committee, 040111
- Amicus Brief Voom v. Echostar, John Jablonski and Conor R. Crowley, 032911
- Supbpoenas FRCP 45, LCJ Comment Letter to Judge Campbell, 033011
- LCJ Comment, Preservation: Moving the Paradigm, to Civil Rules Advisory Committee 111010