A federal rulemaking advisory panel has unanimously approved two summary judgment rule revisions to help create uniformity, but critics aren't happy. One change would require parties to file a statement of uncontested material facts. The other would amend Rule 56 to require motions to be made within 30 days of the close of discovery. The revisions must undergo a lengthy approval process. In another matter, the panel is looking at New Jersey's policy of protecting draft expert reports from discovery.
May 01, 2007 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
A federal rulemaking advisory panel has unanimously approved two summary judgment rule revisions to override the patchwork of inconsistent requirements.
One change would require parties to file a statement of uncontested material facts with motions and responses.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
