CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 14.ppt

CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 14 Professor Fischer Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America October 9, 2001 WRAP-UP OF LAST CLASS We finished learning procedure for bringing third parties into an action under FRCP 14 (impleader) We began to learn about the SCOPE of discovery under the FRCP by examining the concept of RELEVANCE under FRCP 26(b) We identified a change in the concept of relevance that was implemented by the 2000 amendments, and considered its potential effects. WHAT WILL WE DO TODAY? Review impleader by doing Practice Exercise 13 Continue to learn about the scope of discovery under Rule 26(b) . We will discuss relevance, limits on discovery, and privilege, focusing on attorney work product privilege Begin our study of specific discovery techniques by learning about initial disclosures and, time permitting, depositions, and interrogatories Practice Exercise 13: Impleader Is the third party complaint properly drafted? Since the P has settled with the City, can Ultimate Auto (“UA”) still implead the garage? If P settles the claim against UA can our client still recover on the third party claim against McGill’s Garage? If so, what will UA have to prove in such a lawsuit? What are the overall strategic gains/losses by settling/not settling? RELEVANCE What is “relevance”? Undefined in rule Pre-2000 amendments was defined very broadly as e.g. “germane” Post-2000 amendments appear to narrow concept of relevance Do you think that these changes will have a real effect on the scope of discovery? RELEVANCE AND ADMISSIBILITY Includes written matter, things, ID of persons with knowledge of matter, information about location of persons with knowledge of discoverable materials - including investigators To be discoverable, must information be admissible at trial under applicable rules of evidence? A PROPOSED RULE CHANGE THAT DID NOT MAKE IT In September 1999, one proposed change to the FRCP was rejected by the Judicial Conference. The proposal would