Three experienced lawyers have been invited to attend the afternoon session on April 28 to discuss the history of Rule 23 beginning with the 1966 amendments and to discuss its present effects. John P. Frank, Esq., Professor Francis E. McGovern, and Herbert M. Wachtel, Esq. The recommendation that the Judicial Conference suspend its endorsement of such legislation pending completion of Enabling Act consideration may be on the Conference discussion calendar in March. Groups dissatisfied with the new rule have used it to focus attention on the Enabling Act process. The milder reactions are that Congress should lengthen the period between submission of rule amendments to it and the effective date.
Stronger reactions address more fundamental aspects of the process.
Several members observed that local rules generate far more complaints than the national rules. The problems become more aggravated as practice becomes increasingly nationalized. Once again, as at earlier meetings, the hope was expressed that evaluation of experience under the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 will provide the occasion to reduce the proliferation of local rules. The style revisions were reviewed by subcommittees for presentation to the full Committee. Judge Doty led a group that reviewed Rules 21 through 25.