The U.S. House of Representatives could consider two tort reform bills next week.
Both the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act and the Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency Act have been placed on the House’s schedule, according to GovTrack.us. The Hill reported Tuesday that House Republicans will “call up” the bills next week. LARA, or House Resolution 2655, imposes mandatory sanctions on lawyers who file meritless suits in federal court. Specifically, the bill: - Reinstates sanctions for the violation of Rule 11. Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure was originally intended to deter frivolous lawsuits by sanctioning the offending party; - Ensures that judges impose monetary sanctions against lawyers who file frivolous lawsuits, including the attorney’s fees and costs incurred by the victim of the frivolous lawsuit; and - Reverses the 1993 amendments to Rule 11 that allow parties and their attorneys to avoid sanctions for making frivolous claims by withdrawing them within 21 days after a motion for sanctions has been served. Smith The House Judiciary Committee passed the bill, sponsored by U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, in September. “LARA encourages attorneys to think twice before filing frivolous lawsuits,” Smith said at the time. The FACT Act, or House Resolution 982, requires more transparency from asbestos trusts. The House Judiciary Committee passed the bill, sponsored by U.S. Rep. Blake Farenthold,... |
Copyright
(c) 2010-2025 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.
Showing posts with label United States House Committee on the Judiciary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label United States House Committee on the Judiciary. Show all posts
Saturday, November 9, 2013
Tort reform bills placed on U.S. House schedule; could be considered next week
ABA: Too few judges, lack of funding hurting federal courts
The American Bar Association, in a letter last week, says the combination of too few judges and insufficient funding is diminishing the ability of the federal courts to “serve the people and deliver timely justice.”
Thomas Susman, director of the ABA’s Governmental Affairs Office, sent a letter to U.S. Rep. Robert Goodlatte to be made part of the record in a hearing on the need for federal judgeships. Goodlatte Last week, Goodlatte, R-Va. and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, held a hearing titled, “Are More Judges Always the Answer?” Goodlatte contends President Barack Obama and Senate Democrats see the courts as an avenue to advance their agendas. “When the Senate Majority Leader said, ‘We’re focusing very intently on the D.C. Circuit’ and ‘We need at least one more. There’s three vacancies. And that will switch the majority,’ he clearly wasn’t referring to the court’s needs,” he said during the Oct. 29 hearing. But the ABA argues that when federal courts do not have sufficient judges to keep up with the workload, civil trial dockets end up taking a back seat to criminal dockets. “As a result, persistent judge shortages increase the length of time that civil litigants and businesses wait for their day in court, create pressures that ‘robotize’ justice, and increase case backlogs that will perpetuate delays for years to... |
Related articles
- Tort reform bills placed on U.S. House schedule; could be considered next week (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Thirty-one federal court facilities to be downsized (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Electronic Filing: The Ideal System for Workers' Compensation (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Federal Court Deems CMS Interpretation of the MSP Act Impenetrable (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Judge denies jury trial in Chevron RICO case (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)