Working Smarter, Not Harder: How Excellent Judges Manage Cases

In 2012, the American College of Trial Lawyers (“ACTL”) Task Force on Discovery and Civil Justice, the ACTL Judiciary Committee, ACTL Jury Committee, ACTL Special Problems in the Administration of Justice Committee, and IAALS, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver, undertook a study on practices and methods for pretrial management of civil cases that might reduce cost and delays for litigants while saving judicial time and resources. This report is based on personal interviews with approximately 30 state and federal trial court judges, from diverse jurisdictions across the country, who were identified as being outstanding case managers and whose civil case management experience can serve as a model for others. Five general themes emerged from the interviews, with numerous specific practices and techniques discussed further in the report. Assess a case and its challenges at the outset. Use active and continuing judicial involvement when warranted to keep the parties and the case on track. There was strong consensus among the judges interviewed that becoming involved at the earliest stage of a case is critical. Some judges review cases as soon as they are assigned. Others hold off until the time of the initial case management or Rule 16 conference. Virtually all interviewed judges, however, agreed that a small expenditure of time at the very beginning of a case saves significantly more time as the case progresses. Convene an initial case management conference early in the life of the case. Discuss with the parties anticipated problems and issues, as well as deadlines for major case events. Initial conferences provide a valuable opportunity for judges to get a feel for the relative complexity of the case and the relationships among the parties and their counsel. By spending time in advance familiarizing themselves with the pleadings, judges can establish priorities for discovery. By obtaining input from counsel about the realistic timing for trial and for various pretrial events — such as amendment of pleadings, joinder of additional parties, discovery cutoffs, and expert disclosures — judges can establish a firm trial date and work backwards to set necessary pretrial deadlines that will assist in moving the case forward expeditiously. By limiting continuances to serious and unanticipated circumstances, judges can work toward meaningful and timely resolution in processing the case. Reduce and streamline motions practice to the extent appropriate and possible. Rule quickly on motions. The judges emphasized that motions practice drives cost and delay in the civil pretrial process. Many judges aim to resolve motions, especially discovery disputes, informally. This obviates the need for written submissions and focuses on oral presentations. The judges interviewed also overwhelmingly believe that prompt rulings on motions, including those announced from the bench, can dramatically expedite progress in cases, reduce litigants’ expenses, save judicial time and resources, and enhance ultimate resolution. Create a culture of collegiality and professionalism by being explicit and up front with lawyers about the court’s expectations, and then holding the participants to them. Interviewed judges universally recognized the importance of collegiality and professionalism among counsel. Most judges interviewed make their expectations of civility explicit during the initial discussions with counsel in the pretrial process. Explore settlement with the parties at an early stage and periodically throughout the pretrial process, where such conversations might benefit the parties and move the case toward resolution. Keeping the subject of settlement on the table expedites resolution, and periodically opening the topic for discussion may give lawyers the cover needed, with clients and opposing counsel, to avoid the appearance of negotiating from a position of weakness. The collective experience of these judges suggests several techniques that — used individually or together — can expedite resolution of cases with lower cost to litigants and courts. The ACTL and IAALS offer this report to share successful practices, and hope the report will spark further use of these and other practices to better serve litigants, lawyers, and the court. This report is primarily designed to provide civil trial court judges with proven techniques used by outstanding judges for more efficient pretrial case management. Nonetheless, trial lawyers may also choose to encourage adoption of these recommendations for use in cases they are handling, in order to decrease the delays and costs of today’s litigation.