Federal Civil Practice

The newsletter of the ISBA’s Section on Federal Civil Practice

ISBA Members, please login to join this section

2015 Articles

Beware the errata sheet! By Kevin Lovellette & Summer Hallaj June 2015 A hypothetical scenario that illustrates the type of situation in which a government lawyer may find himself or herself when an opposing party seeks to retrospectively alter the substance of a witness’ original deposition testimony.
Deposition objections: Are you saying too much? Or too little? By Daniel Thies April 2015 A recent federal court decision from the Northern District of Iowa, Security Nat’l Bank of Sioux City v. Abbot Labs appears to criticize counsel both for saying too little, and also for saying too much. How are counsel to navigate this potential minefield?
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 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.
Helping pro se litigants settle cases in federal court By Hon. James F. Holderman April 2015 Please consider volunteering for the Northern District's Settlement Assistance Program.
Juror not disqualified by mistaken belief as to the law By Michael R. Lied December 2015 In Marshall v. City of Chicago, the plaintiff sought to exclude a potential juror and also to expand the size of the jury during voir dire.
A modest proposal for a better rule 30(b)(6) deposition By Hon. Iain D. Johnston June 2015 The next time “your friend” encounters this type of distasteful circumstance, consider the advice in this article.
Off the record: Guidelines for deposition breaks By JoAnna Pollock April 2015 Concerns about witness coaching and deposition break schedules have recently made their way to the courts.
Posttrial motions—Did the jury get it right? By Stanley N. Wasser December 2015 Following the return of verdict and the entry of judgment thereon, you may receive in the mail one or two motions: one filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(b) and one filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59. A Rule 59 post-trial motion may be filed separately, either in conjunction with or as an alternative to a Rule 50(b) motion. Here is a primer to help you get started.
Prevailing party versus nominal awards: A look at Aponte v. City of Chicago By Lisle A. Stalter June 2015 A judgment in favor of the plaintiff doesn't necessarily mean the plaintiff is a “prevailing party” for an award of attorney fees.
The proposed 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure By Timothy J. Chorvat 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.
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 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.