FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1135091453> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1135091453 abstract "This Article focuses on pending amendments to Rule 26(b)(1), the scope-of-discovery provision in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Proposed Rule 26(b)(1) would authorize parties to obtain discovery of “any non-privileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or defense” if that information is also “proportional to the needs of the case,” based on enumerated proportionality factors – “the importance of the issues at state in the action, the amount in controversy, the parties’ relative access to relevant information, the parties’ resources, the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues, and whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit.” The Article contends that the proposed proportional discovery amendment, combined with other proposed amendments to Rule 26(b)(1), completes the move, in the federal courts, from a default philosophy of liberal discovery to a landscape in which there is no default or guiding principle, save for an open-ended appeal to proportionality. Proposed Rule 26(b)(1) promotes proportionality but lacks the normative guideposts that could instruct proportionality decisions, defaulting instead to a balancing process that provides minimal guidance on priority among factors or the weight to be accorded factors.The Article observes that the policymaking required of judges to determine the permissible scope of discovery under the proposed proportionality standard is at the boundaries of the institutional competence of the federal courts, at variance with the separation of powers instinct and requirement of the Rules Enabling Act, and may decrease the deference due to substantive law under the Erie doctrine.The Article reaches three conclusions regarding implementation of the pending proportionality standard. First, in making decisions regarding proportional discovery, judges should further the normative preferences of Congress and other lawmakers in cases involving favored statutory claims and should also further rights otherwise recognized in the substantive law. Second, judges should articulate the rationale underlying their proportionality decisions in order to, inter alia, promote development of the law regarding proportionality in discovery; enhance appellate review of proportionality decisions; and provide the necessary flexibility for proportionality decisions, while revealing the extent of court adherence to normative preferences of Congress and other lawmakers. Third, the federal rulemakers should revisit the issue of proportionality in discovery and (1) provide greater guidance regarding application of the proportionality factors or (2) create a general set of discovery procedures applicable in most cases and supplement those general procedures with substance-specific protocols for selected substantive claims." @default.
• W1135091453 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1135091453 creator A5023316338 @default.
• W1135091453 date "2015-06-10" @default.
• W1135091453 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W1135091453 title "'Just a Bit Outside!': Proportionality in Federal Discovery and the Institutional Capacity of the Federal Courts" @default.
• W1135091453 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W1135091453 type Work @default.
• W1135091453 sameAs 1135091453 @default.
• W1135091453 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W1135091453 crossrefType "posted-content" @default.
• W1135091453 hasAuthorship W1135091453A5023316338 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConcept C183763965 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConcept C2778449503 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConcept C2780858371 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConcept C69637215 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConceptScore W1135091453C10138342 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConceptScore W1135091453C144133560 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConceptScore W1135091453C162324750 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConceptScore W1135091453C17744445 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConceptScore W1135091453C183763965 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConceptScore W1135091453C190253527 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConceptScore W1135091453C199539241 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConceptScore W1135091453C2778272461 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConceptScore W1135091453C2778449503 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConceptScore W1135091453C2780858371 @default.
• W1135091453 hasConceptScore W1135091453C69637215 @default.
• W1135091453 hasLocation W11350914531 @default.
• W1135091453 hasOpenAccess W1135091453 @default.
• W1135091453 hasPrimaryLocation W11350914531 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W1586090806 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W2262206300 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W2266977634 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W2267103469 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W2272519567 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W2302152402 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W253689378 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W3040557448 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W3122160480 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W3122841164 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W3122914489 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W3123393395 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W3125124582 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W3125399829 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W3125883211 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W3154167793 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W3154435370 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W3198508574 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W95950226 @default.
• W1135091453 hasRelatedWork W3122622849 @default.
• W1135091453 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1135091453 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1135091453 magId "1135091453" @default.
• W1135091453 workType "article" @default.