Section Newsletters

Articles on Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

FRCP 11 Sanctions for Advocating Bad Discovery Papers? By Jeffrey A. Parness Federal Civil Practice, September 2022 How Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure might apply to advocating from what are now, but were not always, bad discovery papers.
Amended Rule 30(b)(6) Fed. R. Civ. P. Requires Conference Regarding Matters for Examination in a 30(b)(6) Deposition By Patricia S. Smart Federal Civil Practice, December 2020 Effective December 1, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6) now imposes a requirement that the party serving a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition notice or subpoena and the organization to be deposed confer regarding the matters for examination.
Efficiency, economy, and consistency: 2018-2019 amendments to the Federal Rules By Erin Gasparka Bench and Bar, January 2019 The 2018-2019 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure communicate a steady resolve to have the Rules evolve with the times through principles of efficiency, economy, and consistency.  
Interpretation of recent amendments to FRCP 37(e) taking shape By Patricia Mathy Bench and Bar, November 2017 As with any amended Rule shortly after implementation, several open questions remain as to how the new Rule 37(e) will be interpreted and applied.
Rule 502: Something Illinois litigants can learn from federal courts By Eli Litoff, Kelly Warner, & Edward Casmere Bench and Bar, May 2017 Rule 502 sets forth several significant provisions – including 502(d) – which can be implemented by the courts and parties to proactively address production and protection of privileged material.
The effects of the December 1, 2015 amendments from one judge’s perspective By Iain D. Johnston Federal Civil Practice, September 2016 U.S. Magistrate Judge Iain Johnston shares how the amended Federal Rules have affected his courtroom.
Lost Electronically Stored Information (ESI) By Jeffrey A. Parness Federal Civil Practice, September 2016 A review of the basic features of the new FRCP 37(e), its counterparts in Illinois, and its impact on all Illinois lawyers, wherever they practice.
Operating under the amended Federal Rules 16 and 26 of Civil Procedure: A plaintiff’s lawyer’s perspective By Jo Anna Pollock Federal Civil Practice, September 2016 While the Federal Rules were amended to address discovery practice, the amendments are not as one-sided as they appear at first blush. Preparation coupled with reasonableness in your approach will net you the discovery that you need. 
Lost Electronically Stored Information (ESI) By Jeffrey A. Parness Civil Practice and Procedure, July 2016 A review of the basic features of the new FRCP 37(e), its counterparts in Illinois, and its impact on all Illinois lawyers, wherever they practice.
The new Rules of Federal Procedure—They’re here By John J. Holevas Federal Civil Practice, February 2016 A highlight of five of the most significant changes to the discovery rules of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The possible impact of the new and proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on Illinois civil practice By Jeffrey A. Parness Civil Practice and Procedure, January 2016 At the close of 2015 there were several major federal civil procedure rulemaking initiatives involving the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures. What were included in these initiatives and what do they suggest about possible new Illinois civil practice reforms?
Final pretrial practice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(e) and the local rules of the Southern, Central, and Northern Districts of Illinois By Arsenio L. Mims Federal Civil Practice, December 2015 A look at how the local rules of the Southern, Central, and Northern Districts of Illinois vary with respect to the application of Rule 16(e) for final pretrial practice in their respective courts.
A modest proposal for a better rule 30(b)(6) deposition By Hon. Iain D. Johnston Federal Civil Practice, June 2015 The next time “your friend” encounters this type of distasteful circumstance, consider the advice in this article.
Summary judgment without asking: The Power of a United States District Court Judge to enter Summary Judgment sua sponte under Rule 56(f) By Hon. Tom Schanzle-Haskins Federal Civil Practice, June 2015 Rule 56(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure codifies previously existing law which permits granting sua sponte summary judgment by a District Court.
The proposed 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure By Timothy J. Chorvat Federal Civil Practice, April 2015 Barring an unexpected change of course, important amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will go into effect on December 1, 2015.
Announcements Federal Civil Practice, December 2013 Two news items to take note of.
FRCP 12(c) - Motion for Judgment On The Pleadings: A useful tool for both plaintiffs and defendants By Stanley N. Wasser Federal Civil Practice, December 2013 A guide for practitioners using a Rule 12(c) motion.
Significant amendments to Rule 45 of the Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure are in effect as of December 1, 2013 By Patricia S. Smart Federal Civil Practice, December 2013 The amendments create significant changes to federal subpoena practice.
FRCP 12(c) - Motion for judgment on the pleadings: A useful tool for both plaintiffs and defendants By Stanley N. Wasser Corporate Law Departments, November 2013 Given that a computer research search for “12(c)” federal cases this year to date turns up over a thousand case citations, having a good handle on when to use or how to defend against a Rule 12(c) motion is something that federal court practitioners should seriously consider.
Supreme Court affirms award of costs to defendant under F.R.CIV.P. 54 (d)(1) By Michael R. Lied Federal Civil Practice, September 2013 A summary of Marx v. General Revenue Corp.
What’s “plausible” in the post-Twombly and Iqbal world? A review of recent Seventh Circuit decisions By Jo Anna Pollock Federal Civil Practice, March 2013 A review of recent Seventh Circuit cases that have interpreted Twombly and Iqbal, and a look at how both plaintiffs and defendants should characterize a plaintiff’s complaint when arguing whether a plaintiff failed to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 12(b)(6).
The demands of a jury demand By Travis J. Ketterman Federal Civil Practice, March 2012 While the right to a jury trial is deemed a fundamental right, the right is not self-enforcing. Thus, a party seeking a jury trial—even a party with a cause of action that entitles the party to a jury—must affirmatively demand a jury trial. Rule 38(b) dictates the jury demand requirements.  
FRCP 45—The toolbox of discovery has pending amendments By Ambrose V. McCall Federal Civil Practice, March 2012 All Illinois counsel who practice in federal court may want to calendar a few dates in late 2012 or early 2013 to not only check on the status of FRCP 45, but to review their office procedures to see if they comply with the provisions detailing how we use one of our primary tools for conducting discovery.
A reader on service of process under FRCP 4 By Ambrose V. McCall Federal Civil Practice, September 2011 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) provides that a complaint to serve a defendant must be filed within 120 days.
The Rule 30(B)(6) witness deposition—A primer By Stanley N. Wasser Federal Civil Practice, September 2011 An helpful explanation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6).  
New amendments to Rule 26 limit discovery of experts and their lawyers By Glenn R. Gaffney Labor and Employment Law, June 2011 Important amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 became effective December 1, 2010.
To disclose or not to disclose under FRCP(a)(2) —That now is the question! By Ambrose V. McCall Federal Civil Practice, June 2011 The Seventh Circuit has issued a trio of opinions during the past six months or more that stress the need for counsel to evaluate what opinion testimony at trial might require counsel to make disclosures beforehand under FRCP 26(a)(2).
New federal procedural rules By Jay H. Scholl Federal Civil Practice, March 2011 A brief review of the December 2010 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Discovering Electronically Stored Information (ESI): Self-Reliance and FRCivP 26* By Daniel Kegan Intellectual Property, December 2010 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 (b)(2)(B) now requires an early conference among attorneys to discuss and plan discovery, including Electronically Stored Information (ESI). Attorneys cannot simply delegate to clients or commercial services the responsibility of understanding ESI and ESI discovery planning. The attorney has a non- delegable responsibility to know, not only traditional discovery relevance but also enough about email, computers, file archiving, the client’s business, and human nature to competently supervise others. This article presents an efficient procedure for self-reliant attorneys and firms to successfully manage the ESI discovery process. Guidelines are presented for both Macintosh and Windows computers.
New Procedural Rules—and more may be on the horizon By Camille M. Knight Federal Civil Practice, March 2010 Summaries of the amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, local rules, and statutory changes.

Select a Different Subject