The Fragmentation of Federal Rules

38 Pages Posted: 27 Jun 2018

See all articles by Erwin Chemerinsky

Erwin Chemerinsky

University of California, Berkeley - School of Law

Barry Friedman

New York University School of Law

Date Written: 1995

Abstract

This Article critiques the movement to localism in rulemaking. In doing so, we put largely to one side the very difficult and very controversial questions of whether there is a litigation "crisis" in the federal courts, whether procedural reform can or will address that crisis, and whether any particular procedure is a good one. Rather, our focus is on the somewhat more limited but perhaps ultimately most important question of whether it really is a good idea for every district court in the country to go its own way in developing civil process. Our answer, simply put, is no. The ill-considered and unmanaged proliferation of local rules is likely to exacerbate any problems there are with civil litigation. Different procedural rules will have an impact upon substantive justice. Varying procedures will lead to forum shopping, unnecessary cost, and widespread confusion. Amidst strong arguments against localism in rulemaking, there is almost no serious argument that supports it.

Suggested Citation

Chemerinsky, Erwin and Friedman, Barry, The Fragmentation of Federal Rules (1995). Mercer Law Review Vol. 46; NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2821700

Erwin Chemerinsky

University of California, Berkeley - School of Law ( email )

215 Boalt Hall
Berkeley, CA 94720-7200
United States

HOME PAGE: https://www.law.berkeley.edu/our-faculty/faculty-profiles/erwin-chemerinsky/

Barry Friedman (Contact Author)

New York University School of Law ( email )

40 Washington Square South
Room 317
New York, NY 10012-1099
United States
212-998-6293 (Phone)
212-995-4030 (Fax)

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
5
Abstract Views
71
PlumX Metrics