American Bar Foundation Research Journal · 1981 · 19 citations · 4 references
LawProcedural LawPublic LawCivil ProcedureCriminal ProcedureLawmakingDispute ResolutionJudicial PolicymakingJudicial ReformLegal ProcedureLegal SystemsCourt SanctionCourt Supervision Of DiscoveryDiscoveryJudicial External ControlsJudicial RulesPretrial PracticeSanctionsSanctions Litigation
This article follows two earlier pieces in which the author reported the findings of a pilot empirical exploration of how well the discovery system in civil litigation is functioning. Brazil begins by focusing on the principal problems his field studies exposed and by suggesting a theory of discovery reform which responds to the nature and sources of those problems. His principal thesis is that too often neither judges nor attorneys assume sufficient responsibility for the discovery system as a system. Most of this article is devoted to two major proposals that are designed to promote in the judiciary and in counsel a sense of responsibility for the pretrial system and to equip the judiciary to convert that sense into action. Brazil proposes a comprehensive model rule that courts could use to manage the pretrial development of civil actions. He then uses his model as a background for suggesting modifications to and extensions of the proposed revision of Rule 16 that the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules has circulated for comment. He also offers a critique of current provisions for sanctions and advances an alternative sanctions rule that acknowledges a right to compensation for damages caused by an opponent's breach of pretrial obligations and that reduces the scope of judicial discretion to refuse to impose compensatory awards.
4