DOCSLIB.ORG

A Report on the Bay Area Complex Litigation Superior Courts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Report on the Bay Area Complex Litigation Superior Courts A Report on the Bay Area Complex Litigation Superior Courts By Frank Burke, Chandra S. Russell, Stephanie D. Biehl, Adam R. Brausa, Adrian Canzoneri, Shana Inspektor, Kapri L. Saunders, and Ashley L. Shively Winter 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I: INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW .......................................................................................1 PART II: INTERVIEW SUMMARIES .................................................................................................11 San Francisco County Superior Court .................................................................................12 Interview of Hon. Mary E. Wiss ...................................................................................13 Interview of Hon. Curtis E.A. Karnow ..........................................................................19 San Mateo County Superior Court .....................................................................................25 Interview of Hon. Marie S. Weiner ..............................................................................26 Santa Clara County Superior Court ....................................................................................35 Interview of Hon. Brian C. Walsh ...............................................................................36 Interview of Hon. Thomas E. Kuhnle ...........................................................................42 Alameda County Superior Court ........................................................................................46 Interview of Hon. Winifred Smith .................................................................................47 Interview of Hon. George C. Hernandez ......................................................................54 Interview of Hon. Brad Seligman ................................................................................59 Contra Costa County Superior Court ..................................................................................65 Interview of Hon. Barry P. Goode ..............................................................................66 The Interview Team ............................................................................................................73 PART III: APPENDIX OF GUIDELINES & SAMPLE ORDERS .......................................................... A-1 San Francisco County Superior Court .............................................................................. A-2 Hon. Curtis E.A. Karnow ......................................................................................... A-3 Complex Litigation Users’ Manual .......................................................... A-4 Class Action Materials ............................................................................. A-9 Jury Trial Preparation ............................................................................ A-14 i Pre-Trial Filing Events – Bench Trial ...................................................... A-18 Hon. Mary E. Wiss ............................................................................................... A-20 Standard Discovery Order Issued at Initial CMC ................................... A-21 San Mateo County Superior Court ................................................................................ A-22 Hon. Marie S. Weiner ........................................................................................... A-23 Complex Civil Litigation Guidelines ....................................................... A-24 Case Management Order #1 and Order for Permissive E-Filing ........... A-27 Case Management Order #11 and Order Setting Jury Trial ................. A-33 Stipulation and Protective Order – Single Level of Confidentiality ...... A-39 Stipulation and Protective Order – Double Level of Confidentiality ... A-48 Santa Clara County Superior Court ............................................................................... A-57 Complex Civil Guidelines ...................................................................................... A-58 Hon. Brian C. Walsh ............................................................................................. A-82 Rules of Safe Passage ............................................................................ A-83 Jury Selection ........................................................................................ A-84 Alameda County Superior Court ................................................................................... A-85 Hon. Winifred Smith ............................................................................................. A-86 General Guidelines ................................................................................ A-87 Discovery Disputes ................................................................................ A-90 Procedural Guidelines for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlements ........................................................................................... A-91 Procedural Guidelines for Final Approval of Class Action Settlements ........................................................................................... A-94 Recommended Court Contact Information Language to Include in Class Notices ......................................................................................... A-97 Guidelines for Sealed Documents ......................................................... A-99 ii Copies of Non-California Authorities .................................................. A-101 Hon. George C. Hernandez ................................................................................. A-102 General Guidelines for Litigating in Dept. 17...................................... A-103 Model Protective Order for Complex Cases ....................................... A-106 Hon. Brad Seligman ........................................................................................... A-112 Complex Litigation .............................................................................. A-113 Order Designating Case Complex Litigation ....................................... A-116 Order re Appointment of Provisional Designated Defense Counsel .. A-117 Preliminary Fact Sheet New Filing – Asbestos Litigation .................... A-127 Initial Case Management Order – Asbestos ....................................... A-130 Contra Costa County Superior Court ........................................................................... A-137 Hon. Barry P. Goode .......................................................................................... A-138 A Handy Guide to Department 17 ...................................................... A-139 Notice of Assignment for Case Management Determination ............ A-143 Order re Trial and Issue Conference ................................................... A-145 Issue Conference Checklist ................................................................. A-153 Electronic Case Filing Standing Order ................................................. A-158 iii PART I: INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW 1 This Part I provides an overview of our Introduction and interview findings. Part II contains the complete interview summaries for each Judge prepared by The Interview Team. Part Overview III contains supplemental materials, including guidelines and sample orders, In the summer and fall of 2017, we offered by the Judges. conducted one-on-one interviews of the nine Bay Area Complex Litigation Judges on Case Mix behalf of the Association of Business Trial Lawyers (ABTL). Our goal was to provide a The case mix information was either comparative perspective for practicing anecdotal or based on the individual lawyers about the respective Judges’ case Judges’ case management data, since none mix, standard pretrial and trial practices, of the Counties track this information in their likes and dislikes concerning lawyer their official statistics. conduct, and other as-yet-unpublished feedback for counsel. The interviewers All of the Judges reported that employment asked the Judges a common set of prepared and wage hour class action and PAGA questions on these topics. actions constitute either their largest category of actions or are among the top The Judges interviewed were Hon. Mary E. two types of actions in their court. They Wiss and Hon. Curtis E. A. Karnow of San constitute 48-50% of the actions in Santa Francisco County; Hon. Marie S. Weiner of Clara, 35% of the actions in San Mateo, 10- San Mateo County; Hon. Brian C. Walsh and 43% of the actions in the various Alameda Hon. Thomas E. Kuhnle of Santa Clara Departments, and one of the top two County; Hon. Winifred Smith, Hon. George categories in San Francisco and Contra C. Hernandez, and Hon. Brad Seligman of Costa. Alameda County; and Hon. Barry P. Goode of Contra Costa County. The next largest categories vary by County. Contra Costa has significant construction The authors of this report comprised The defect and mass tort cases, and Judge interview Team (further details are included Goode also handles CEQA cases. San at the end of Section II). Francisco has significant mass tort claims as well as many coordinated and consolidated After preparing our interview notes and this claims of various types. Another overview, we provided them to the Judges Department handles asbestos and CEQA for editing and comments. The Judges were claims. In San Mateo County, securities extremely generous with their time, both in actions are approximately 15% of the total the interviews and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Compulsory Counterclaim Committee
    Report of Boyd-Graves Conference Compulsory Counterclaim Committee Members of the Committee to Study a Proposal to Adopt a Compulsory Counterclaim Rule are Stuart Raphael, Ham Bryson, Bob Mitchell, David Anthony, Jack Costello, Kent Sinclair, Lisa O’Donnell, Bill Mims, and Robin Wood, Chairman. The Committee has met thrice by conference call: on March 25, 2008, April 30, 2008, and May 22, 2008. In the initial conference the Chairman polled members of the Committee to determine if there was a consensus among members of the Committee in favor of a compulsory counterclaim. Seven members of the Committee said they were in favor of a compulsory counterclaim, and two members of the Committee expressed reservations about a compulsory counterclaim rule. In response to an inquiry about a compulsory counterclaim rule in other states, Kent thought that over 40 states had adopted a compulsory counterclaim rule. The Chairman asked members to state their reasons for their position. Those members who were in favor of the rule felt that it was good public policy for all claims arising out of the same transaction or occurrence to be joined in one action. A compulsory counterclaim rule promotes judicial economy and efficiency. Under Rule 1:6, the plaintiff is required to join all claims that arise out of an identified conduct, transaction or occurrence, or later be barred from bringing a second or subsequent action against the same opposing party (parties) arising out the same conduct, transaction or occurrence. The adoption of a compulsory counterclaim rule would require the opposing party to state a claim arising out of the conduct identified in the complaint, crossclaim, or third party claim.
    [Show full text]
  • Indiana Commercial Courts Handbook
    INDIANA COMMERCIAL COURTS HANDBOOK Modified July 20, 2020 Table of Contents BACKGROUND OF THE INDIANA COMMERCIAL COURTS .....................4 1. HANDBOOK DEVELOPMENT............................................................................................................ 5 2. HISTORY OF THE INDIANA COMMERCIAL COURT ................................................................................. 6 3. ORDER ESTABLISHING THE INDIANA COMMERCIAL COURT PILOT PROJECT ............................................. 10 4. ORDER ESTABLISHING THE INDIANA COMMERCIAL COURT .................................................................. 12 5. COMMERCIAL COURT RULES ........................................................................................................ 14 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................. 30 § 1.1 JUDGE’S ROLE ....................................................................................................................... 31 § 1.2 COUNSEL’S ROLE ................................................................................................................... 34 § 1.3 APPOINTING A COMMERCIAL COURT MASTER ............................................................................. 36 § 1.4 USING COURT-APPOINTED EXPERTS .......................................................................................... 37 § 1.5 RELATED LITIGATION ............................................................................................................... 38 CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCES................................................
    [Show full text]
  • RULE 26(F) REPORT Case No.: Date of Initial Conference: Plaintiff(S
    RULE 26(f) REPORT Case No.: Date of Initial Conference: Plaintiff(s): Defendants(s): Phase 1 Discovery Phase 1 discovery entails reciprocal and agreed upon document production and other discovery necessary for a reasoned consideration of settlement. 1. Date for completion of automatic disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, if not yet made: ________________. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(C) (“Unless otherwise agreed upon, the date for completion will be 14 days following the Rule 26(f) conference.”). (Alternatively, of because of the nature of the case, initial disclosures are not required check here: ____ ). 2. Date for exchange of discovery necessary for reasoned consideration of settlement: __________. (This includes, where appropriate, executions of HIPAA records authorizations. Presumptively 60 days after initial conference).1 3. Settlement Conference and Mediation a. Option 1: Date for initial settlement conference: ____________. (The parties should propose a date approximately 10-15 days after the completion of document exchange. Should the settlement conference be adjourned for any reason, the parties must still proceed forward Phase 2 discovery, unless the parties make a motion and the Court grant the extension of the existing deadlines.) b. Option 2: The parties wish to be referred to the EDNY Mediation Program for mediation to be completed in the next 60 days: _________. 1 Should the parties not agree or absent a court order to the contrary, following the initial conference, the presumptive dates shall constitute the Rule 16 scheduling order in this case. Phase 2 Discovery Phase 2 discovery is post-settlement conference discovery that takes the parties to dispositive motion practice.
    [Show full text]
  • An Alabama School Girl in Paris 1842-1844
    An Alabama School Girl in Paris 1842-1844 the letters of Mary Fenwick Lewis and her family Nancyt/ M. Rohr_____ _ An Alabama School Girl in Paris, 1842-1844 The Letters of Mary Fenwick Lewis and Her Family Edited by Nancy M. Rohr An Alabama School Girl In Paris N a n c y M. Ro h r Copyright Q 2001 by Nancy M. Rohr All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission of the editor. ISPN: 0-9707368-0-0 Silver Threads Publishing 10012 Louis Dr. Huntsville, AL 35803 Second Edition 2006 Printed by Boaz Printing, Boaz, Alabama CONTENTS Preface...................................................................................................................1 EditingTechniques...........................................................................................5 The Families.......................................................................................................7 List of Illustrations........................................................................................10 I The Lewis Family Before the Letters................................................. 11 You Are Related to the Brave and Good II The Calhoun Family Before the Letters......................................... 20 These Sums will Furnish Ample Means Apples O f Gold in Pictures of Silver........................................26 III The Letters - 1842................................................................................. 28 IV The Letters - 1843................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • John Ellis Full Biog 2018
    JOHN ELLIS BULLET BIOG 2018 Formed the legendary BAZOOKA JOE Band members included Adam Ant. First Sex Pistols gig was as support to Bazooka Joe. A very influential band despite making no records. Formed THE VIBRATORS. Released 2 albums for Epic. Also played with Chris Spedding on TV and a couple of shows. REM covered a Vibrators single. Extensive touring and TV/Radio appearances including John Peel sessions. Released 2 solo singles. Played guitar in Jean-Jacques Burnel’s Euroband for UK tour. Formed RAPID EYE MOVEMENT featuring HOT GOSSIP dancers and electronics. Supported Jean-Jacques Burnel’s Euroband on UK tour. Joined Peter Gabriel Band for “China” tour and played on Gabriel’s 4th solo album. Stood in for Hugh Cornwell for 2 shows by THE STRANGLERS at the Rainbow Theatre. Album from gig released. Worked with German duo ISLO MOB on album and single. Started working with Peter Hammill eventually doing many tours and recording on 7 albums. Rejoined THE VIBRATORS for more recording and touring. Founder and press officer for the famous M11 Link Road campaign. Recorded 2 albums under the name of PURPLE HELMETS with Jean-Jacques Burnel and Dave Greenfield of THE STRANGLERS. Played additional guitar on THE STRANGLERS ‘10’ tour. Joined THE STRANGLERS as full time member. Extensive touring and recording over 10 years. Many albums released including live recording of Albert Hall show. Played many festivals across the world. Many TV and Radio appearances. Started recording series of electronic instrumental albums as soundtracks for Art exhibitions. 5 CDs released by Voiceprint. Also released WABI SABI 21©, the first of a trilogy of albums inspired by Japanese culture.
    [Show full text]
  • Circuit Civil Summary Reporting System Manual
    CIRCUIT CIVIL PROCEEDINGS This section provides guidance on procedures to be used when completing the Circuit Civil portion of the monthly SRS forms. For ease of following the SRS forms, this section is divided into the major sections indicated on the form. Each or indicates guidelines and directions that should be followed when completing specific sections of the SRS form. Note: The section entitled Case Type Determinations (pages 4-13 through 4-17) provides case type and category definitions. NUMBER OF FILING EVENTS Number of Filings Please refer to section “A” of the SRS form which reports information associated with the number of cases filed during the specified reporting period. Report these cases filed as of the clerk’s document stamp date. Report in the appropriate case type, the number of complaints or petitions filed during the reporting period. Report cases transferred to the reporting court from another court prior to disposition. Report each parcel as a separate filing for eminent domain cases. Report civil cases which arise out of or occur in conjunction with criminal cases. Report civil cases which arise out of or occur in conjunction with probate cases or other civil suits. If several counts with separate case types are included on a petition or complaint, report the case under the case type that involves the greatest monetary issue. Report each filing in situations where separate petitions/complaints are filed under the same case number. For example, if a petition for a breach of contract is combined under the same case number with a petition for injunctive relief, report each filing under the appropriate case type.
    [Show full text]
  • Les Archives Du Sombre Et De L'expérimental
    Guts Of Darkness Les archives du sombre et de l'expérimental avril 2006 Vous pouvez retrouvez nos chroniques et nos articles sur www.gutsofdarkness.com © 2000 - 2008 Un sommaire de ce document est disponible à la fin. Page 2/249 Les chroniques Page 3/249 ENSLAVED : Frost Chronique réalisée par Iormungand Thrazar Premier album du groupe norvégien chz le label français Osmose Productions, ce "Frost" fait suite au début du groupe avec "Vikingligr Veldi". Il s'agit de mon album favori d'Enslaved suivi de près par "Eld", on ressent une envie et une virulence incroyables dans cette oeuvre. Enslaved pratique un black metal rageur et inspiré, globalement plus violent et ténébreux que sur "Eld". Il n'y a rien à jeter sur cet album, aucune piste de remplissage. On commence après une intro aux claviers avec un "Loke" ravageur et un "Fenris" magnifique avec son riff à la Satyricon et son break ultra mélodique. Enslaved impose sa patte dès 1994, avec la très bonne performance de Trym Torson à la batterie sur cet album, qui s'en ira rejoindre Emperor par la suite. "Svarte vidder" est un grand morceau doté d'une intro symphonique, le développement est excellent, 9 minutes de bonheur musical et auditif. "Yggdrasill" se pose en interlude de ce disque, un titre calme avec voix grave, guimbarde, choeurs et l'utilisation d'une basse fretless jouée par Eirik "Pytten", le producteur de l'album: un intemrède magnifique et judicieux car l'album gagne en aération. Le disque enchaîne sur un "Jotu249lod" destructeur et un Gylfaginning" accrocheur.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Civil and Criminal Rules of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
    LOCAL CIVIL AND CRIMINAL RULES OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY With Revisions as of March 25, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION - 1984 Revision FOREWORD - 1997 Revision Table of Contents Civ. RULE 1.1 RULES OF PROCEDURE; SCOPE OF THESE RULES ........................................ 1 Civ. RULE 1.2 DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................... 1 Civ. RULE 4.1 SERVICE OF PROCESS .............................................................................................. 2 Civ. RULE 5.1 SERVICE AND FILING OF PLEADINGS AND OTHER PAPERS ...................... 2 Civ. RULE 5.2 ELECTRONIC SERVICE AND FILING DOCUMENTS ........................................ 2 Civ. RULE 5.3 CONFIDENTIALITY ORDERS AND RESTRICTING PUBLIC ACCESS UNDER CM/ECF .................................................................................................................................. 10 Civ. RULE 6.1 EXTENSIONS OF TIME AND CONTINUANCES ................................................ 17 Civ. RULE 7.1 APPLICATION AND MOTION PRACTICE .......................................................... 17 Civ. RULE 7.2 AFFIDAVITS AND BRIEFS ...................................................................................... 19 Civ. RULE 8.1 PLEADING DAMAGES ............................................................................................. 20 Civ. RULE 9.1 SPECIAL MATTERS - REVIEW OF SOCIAL SECURITY MATTERS ............ 20 Civ. RULE 9.2 SPECIAL MATTERS
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court Eastern District
    Case 1:05-cv-04781-ENV-MDG Document 5 Filed 01/09/06 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: <pageID> UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X ORDER GOVERNING INITIAL CONFERENCE TAIQUANA MUNGO, AND REQUIRING MANDATORY Plaintiff(s), ELECTRONIC CASE FILING - against - CV 2005-4781 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et ano, (ILG)(MDG) Defendant(s). - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X An initial conference will be held in the above-captioned case on February 3, 2006 at 2:30 p.m. before Marilyn Dolan Go, United States Magistrate Judge, in Courtroom No. 373 at the United States Courthouse, 225 Cadman Plaza East, Brooklyn, New York. All counsel must be present. The parties should first check-in with Chambers in Room 357. Counsel for plaintiff is responsible for confirming that all necessary participants are aware of this conference and should advise the Court in writing at least three days before the conference to report on the status of service of any sued party that has not appeared. PRIOR TO THE CONFERENCE, THE PARTIES MUST COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF RULE 26(f) OF THE FED.R.CIV.P. At least five days before the conference, the parties must discuss: (1) the matters specified in Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) and 16(b); and (2) any anticipated electronic discovery, including the scope of such discovery, the preservation of electronically stored data, and the cost of locating, maintaining and producing that data. If the parties anticipate that expert testimony will be presented, counsel should discuss and attempt to reach an agreement on how material exchanged Case 1:05-cv-04781-ENV-MDG Document 5 Filed 01/09/06 Page 2 of 4 PageID #: <pageID> between counsel and any expert witness will be treated, including (a) the preservation of draft expert reports and written and electronic communications between expert witnesses and counsel and (b) what material will be exchanged between the parties.
    [Show full text]
  • ABBOTT V. PEREZ
    (Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2017 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus ABBOTT, GOVERNOR OF TEXAS, ET AL. v. PEREZ ET AL. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 17–586. Argued April 24, 2018—Decided June 25, 2018* In 2011, the Texas Legislature adopted a new congressional districting plan and new districting maps for the two houses of the State Legis- lature to account for population growth revealed in the 2010 census. To do so, Texas had to comply with a complicated legal regime. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment forbids “ra- cial gerrymandering,” that is, intentionally assigning citizens to a district on the basis of race without sufficient justification. Shaw v. Reno, 509 U. S. 630, 641. But other legal requirements tend to re- quire that state legislatures consider race in drawing districts. Like all States, Texas is subject to §2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), which is violated when a state districting plan provides “less opportunity” for racial minorities “to elect representatives of their choice,” League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry, 548 U. S. 399, 425.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Judicial Court Rules and Orders Effective November 1, 2020
    Massachusetts Rules and Orders of the Supreme Judicial Court Including Amendments effective November 1, 2020. Rules of Professional Conduct Code of Judicial Conduct Orders of the Supreme Judicial Court Published by the Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries Table of Contents Massachusetts Rules and Orders of the Supreme Judicial Court CHAPTER ONE : GENERAL RULES 1:01 Definitions; Conflict with other rules 1:02 Sittings of the Supreme Judicial Court 1:03 Uniform certification of questions of law Section 1. Authority to Answer Certain Questions of Law. Section 2. Method of Invoking. Section 3. Contents of Certification Order. Section 4. Preparation of Certification Order. Section 5. Costs of Certification. Section 6. Briefs and Arguments. Section 7. Opinion. Section 8. Power to Certify. Section 9. Procedure on Certifying. Section 10. Uniformity of Interpretation. Section 11. Short Title. 1:04 Judicial Conference 1:05. Certain contracts by Judicial Officers 1:06 Records of the Supreme Judicial Court, of the Appeals Court, and of the Superior Court Department. Form, style and size of papers. 1:07 Fee Generating appointment and the Maintenance of Appointment Dockets in all Courts 1:08 Form, Style and Size of Papers Filed in all Courts. 1:09 Form of Original Executions for all Courts of the Commonwealth. 1:10 Form of Alias Executions for all Courts of the Commonwealth. 1:11 Rule Relative to the Disposal of Court Papers and Records. Section 1. Scope. Section 2. Definitions. Section 3. Required Permanent Retention of Case Records. Section 4. Retention Periods for Certain Non-Permanent Case Records in the Probate and Family Court Department.
    [Show full text]
  • PROPOSED LOCAL RULES Effective January 1, 2021
    PROPOSED LOCAL RULES effective January 1, 2021 DIVISION II COURT MANAGEMENT – SUPERIOR COURT CHAPTER 2. CIVIL TRIAL COURT MANAGEMENT RULES PART 1. MANAGEMENT DUTIES Rule 2.2 Trial Court Management REPEALED. Reference CRC, rules 3.700, 3.710-3.713, 10.900, 10.901 (Adopted, effective January 1, 2000) (Amended, effective January 1, 2007) (Repealed effective January 1, 2021.) PART 2. CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT Rule 2.3 New Case Management REPEALED. This rule applies to all civil cases with the exception of the following: (1) juvenile court matters; (2) probate matters; (3) family law matters; and (4) civil cases which, based on subject matter, have been assigned to a judge, or to more than one judge, for all purposes. For rules applicable to these exceptions, see CRC 2.20, 2.30, 2.570-2.573, 2.585, 2.810-2.819, 2.830-2.834, 3.650, 3.700-3.735, 3.920-3.927, 3.1370, 3.1380- 3.1385, 3.1590-3.1591, 3.1806, 5.590, 10.900-10.901, 10.910, 10.950-10.953,. A. Purposes and Goals The purposes and goals of the San Mateo Superior Court Civil Case Management System effective January 1, 1992 are: (1) To manage fairly and efficiently, from commencement to disposition, the processing of civil litigation. (2) To prepare the bench and bar for full implementation of the Trial Court Delay Reduction Act (A.B. 3820) on July 1, 1992; and (3) To encourage parties to agree to informal discovery early in the life of the case, to use standard form interrogatories and to promote alternative dispute resolution.
    [Show full text]