Caseflow 'roadmap' leads to LPO

Controlling costs in pre-trial document research is vital for effective caseflow in the US civil courts, a major legal think-tank has said. In a new paper released this month, the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (IAALS) has proposed guidelines for use across the whole US civil justice landscape, to combat rising running costs of initial procedures.

Last month, IP Review Online reported that the institute's research had inspired a cost-cutting initiative in the Seventh Circuit. Primed for a wider impact, the IAALS's latest paper is sure to have positive implications for the legal process outsourcing (LPO) sector, which seeks to lower the costs of pre-trial steps in civil matters, including IP litigation.

Devised in partnership with the American College of Trial Lawyers, the paper – entitled 21st Century Civil Justice System: A Roadmap for Reform – sets out 12 rules designed to drive cost-cutting pilot schemes for pre-trial stages in courts throughout the US.

According to the paper's foreword, 'the nation's civil justice system is too expensive, too cumbersome and takes too long. As a result, the price of justice is high and access is being compromised. Small to mid-sized cases that should be filed are not filed because they fail a reasonable cost/benefit analysis; cases that are brought often settle principally because of costs, not merits. Civil jury trials are disappearing.'

The paper was published with an accompanying document, Civil Caseflow Management Guidelines, which offers practical advice on how the 12 rules can be implemented. The guidance highlights proportionality as the key principle behind cost cutting, and stresses that document research 'is not the purpose of litigation. It is merely a means to an end'.

The guidance adds that document work 'should promote the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of actions and should be conducted in the most efficient, non-redundant, cost-effective method available to procure evidence directly relevant to the claims and defences asserted in the pleadings'.

It is likely that the IAALS guidance will influence legal teams to form partnerships with LPO providers, as a means of achieving the required efficiency and cost mitigation. In particular, the recommendations are likely to benefit lawyers and clients involved in IP litigation – such as patent and trademark disputes, which often involve detailed and costly pre-trial document research. If the institute's recommendations lead to a wider adoption of LPO use, the US IP courts could become more effective.

In the IAALS's view, raising efficiency in the US civil courts would enhance 'a centrepiece of American democracy'. The institute also argued that national standards for improvement would remove the need for courts to devise ad hoc processes to supplement the existing rules. 'The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,' said the institute, were designed to be … one-size-fits-all; offering the full range of procedures for all cases, regardless of case type, amount in controversy, or complexity of the case.

'However,' it added, 'in many cases, the full panoply of pre-trial rules and procedures is not appropriate and only leads to increased costs and delay.'