eDiscovery software company iCONECT is running a webinar on 26 June about Rule 11 FRCP with the title “The Wrath” of Rule 11 – how to get boldly sanctioned.
Rule 11 of the US Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (find it here on the useful Cornell University Law School site) is headed Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions. It is an express and clear statement of the duties which a US lawyer assumes in relation to formal court documents by appending his or her signature to them or by taking any other step such as filing, submitting or presenting arguments. The lawyer’s confirmation thus given covers not only the propriety of presenting the documents or arguments but extends to delay and cost – he or she is stating that the step will not “cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation”.
Lawyers, and not just in the US, are often accused of racking up time and costs by giving or demanding discovery / disclosure whose only purpose is to “cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation”. Rule 11 therefore deserves scrutiny.
iCONECT’s Ian Campbell is taking part in a webinar about Rule 11 called “The Wrath” of Rule 11 – how to get boldly sanctioned on 26 June at 1:00pm EDT along with Joshua Gilliland, “The Bowtie Lawyer”. Since both Ian Campbell and Josh Gilliland are eDiscovery experts, one can be certain that the context for the webinar will be an eDiscovery one.
We are promised a Star Trek them which reminds me of Josh Gilliland’s recent and entertaining post How a lawyer would take a bite out of Amity for the shark attacks in Jaws. What different considerations, he asks, would apply to the liability of Amity for the deaths of skinny-dipping Chrissie Watkins, Alex Kintner and the dog Pippit, and the other victims. One might hope for a similarly inventive approach to Rule 11 in the iCONECT webinar.