Browse Arkansas Code titles and sections
28 U.S.C. § 471 — Requirement for a district court civil jus-
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
Page 163
TITLE 28—JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
§ 471
Sec.
474.
Review of district court action.
475.
Periodic district court assessment.
476.
Enhancement of judicial information dissemi-
nation.
477.
Model civil justice expense and delay reduc-
tion plan.
478.
Advisory groups.
479.
Information on litigation management and
cost and delay reduction.
480.
Training programs.
481.
Automated case information.
482.
Definitions.
§ 471. Requirement for a district court civil jus-
tice expense and delay reduction plan
There shall be implemented by each United
States district court, in accordance with this
chapter, a civil justice expense and delay reduc-
tion plan. The plan may be a plan developed by
such district court or a model plan developed by
the Judicial Conference of the United States.
The purposes of each plan are to facilitate delib-
erate adjudication of civil cases on the merits,
monitor discovery, improve litigation manage-
ment, and ensure just, speedy, and inexpensive
resolutions of civil disputes.
(Added Pub. L. 101–650, title I, § 103(a), Dec. 1,
1990, 104 Stat. 5090; amended Pub. L. 102–198,
§ 2(1), Dec. 9, 1991, 105 Stat. 1623.)
Editorial Notes
AMENDMENTS
1991—Pub. L. 102–198 substituted ‘‘this chapter’’ for
‘‘this title’’.
CONGRESSIONAL STATEMENT OF FINDINGS
Pub. L. 101–650, title I, § 102, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5089,
provided that: ‘‘The Congress makes the following find-
ings:
‘‘(1) The problems of cost and delay in civil litiga-
tion in any United States district court must be ad-
dressed in the context of the full range of demands
made on the district court’s resources by both civil
and criminal matters.
‘‘(2) The courts, the litigants, the litigants’ attor-
neys, and the Congress and the executive branch,
sh
Source: Supplied 2024 U.S. Code historical extraction · 28 U.S.C. § 471
Stored review status: historical_2024_not_currentness_verified. A text match is a research starting point; applicability is not established.
Original supplied file — preserved unchanged
Download original Markdown file
File SHA-256: f36a5b0666f4b787c2353c1b296d2ddf699e101706a3ea0a91248ecb91a50a98. The original may include catalog metadata, neighboring provisions, or embedded records outside this collection's scope. Search shows only the selected federal record. Historical editions and unverified snapshots are not a statement of current law.
Authority boundary: historical or unconfirmed source not current law verified.
Open the recorded source website ↗
Record provenance
Stable record: federal_law:legal_authorities:usc2024-34064ee9eb93939ab4edf8e3
Source file: Laws/federal/codes/united-states-code-2024/title-28/section-471-requirement-for-a-district-court-civil-jus--ab165a22b6.md
Pages: Not recorded – Not recorded
Passage SHA-256: 3dbb5c524258e6a4aa5b658a57c35169e996c82d1ceda1dd8f1b69d9ad261f8d
Source location: USCODE-2024-title28-partI-chap23-sec471.pdf
Stored source content
Page 163
TITLE 28—JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
§ 471
Sec.
474.
Review of district court action.
475.
Periodic district court assessment.
476.
Enhancement of judicial information dissemi-
nation.
477.
Model civil justice expense and delay reduc-
tion plan.
478.
Advisory groups.
479.
Information on litigation management and
cost and delay reduction.
480.
Training programs.
481.
Automated case information.
482.
Definitions.
§ 471. Requirement for a district court civil jus-
tice expense and delay reduction plan
There shall be implemented by each United
States district court, in accordance with this
chapter, a civil justice expense and delay reduc-
tion plan. The plan may be a plan developed by
such district court or a model plan developed by
the Judicial Conference of the United States.
The purposes of each plan are to facilitate delib-
erate adjudication of civil cases on the merits,
monitor discovery, improve litigation manage-
ment, and ensure just, speedy, and inexpensive
resolutions of civil disputes.
(Added Pub. L. 101–650, title I, § 103(a), Dec. 1,
1990, 104 Stat. 5090; amended Pub. L. 102–198,
§ 2(1), Dec. 9, 1991, 105 Stat. 1623.)
Editorial Notes
AMENDMENTS
1991—Pub. L. 102–198 substituted ‘‘this chapter’’ for
‘‘this title’’.
CONGRESSIONAL STATEMENT OF FINDINGS
Pub. L. 101–650, title I, § 102, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5089,
provided that: ‘‘The Congress makes the following find-
ings:
‘‘(1) The problems of cost and delay in civil litiga-
tion in any United States district court must be ad-
dressed in the context of the full range of demands
made on the district court’s resources by both civil
and criminal matters.
‘‘(2) The courts, the litigants, the litigants’ attor-
neys, and the Congress and the executive branch,
share responsibility for cost and delay in civil litiga-
tion and its impact on access to the courts, adjudica-
tion of cases on the merits, and the ability of the
civil justice system to provide proper and timely ju-
dicial relief for aggrieved parties.
‘‘(3) The solutions to problems of cost and delay
must include significant contributions by the courts,
the litigants, the litigants’ attorneys, and by the
Congress and the executive branch.
‘‘(4) In identifying, developing, and implementing
solutions to problems of cost and delay in civil litiga-
tion, it is necessary to achieve a method of consulta-
tion so that individual judicial officers, litigants, and
litigants’ attorneys who have developed techniques
for litigation management and cost and delay reduc-
tion can effectively and promptly communicate those
techniques to all participants in the civil justice sys-
tem.
‘‘(5) Evidence suggests that an effective litigation
management and cost and delay reduction program
should incorporate several interrelated principles, in-
cluding—
‘‘(A) the differential treatment of cases that pro-
vides for individualized and specific management
according to their needs, complexity, duration, and
probable litigation careers;
‘‘(B) early involvement of a judicial officer in
planning the progress of a case, controlling the dis-
covery process, and scheduling hearings, trials, and
other litigation events;
‘‘(C) regular communication between a judicial
officer and attorneys during the pretrial process;
and
‘‘(D) utilization of alternative dispute resolution
programs in appropriate cases.
‘‘(6) Because the increasing volume and complexity
of civil and criminal cases imposes increasingly
heavy workload burdens on judicial officers, clerks of
court, and other court personnel, it is necessary to
create an effective administrative structure to ensure
ongoing consultation and communication regarding
effective litigation management and cost and delay
reduction principles and techniques.’’
Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries
IMPLEMENTATION OF PLANS
Pub. L. 101–650, title I, § 103(b), (c), Dec. 1, 1990, 104
Stat. 5096, as amended by Pub. L. 102–572, title V, § 505,
Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4513; Pub. L. 105–53, § 2, Oct. 6,
1997, 111 Stat. 1173; Pub. L. 106–518, title II, § 206, Nov. 13,
2000, 114 Stat. 2414, provided that:
‘‘(b) IMPLEMENTATION.—(1) Except as provided in sec-
tion 105 of this Act [set out below], each United States
district court shall, within three years after the date of
the enactment of this title [Dec. 1, 1990], implement a
civil justice expense and delay reduction plan under
section 471 of title 28, United States Code, as added by
subsection (a).
‘‘(2)(A) The requirements set forth in sections 471, 472,
473, 474, 475, 477, and 478 of title 28, United States Code,
as added by subsection (a), shall remain in effect for
seven years after the date of the enactment of this
title.
‘‘(B) The requirements set forth in section 476 of title
28, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall
remain in effect permanently.
‘‘(c) EARLY IMPLEMENTATION DISTRICT COURTS.—
‘‘(1) Any United States district court that, no ear-
lier than June 30, 1991, and no later than December 31,
1991, develops and implements a civil justice expense
and delay reduction plan under chapter 23 of title 28,
United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall
be designated by the Judicial Conference of the
United States as an Early Implementation District
Court.
‘‘(2) The chief judge of a district so designated may
apply to the Judicial Conference for additional re-
sources, including technological and personnel sup-
port and information systems, necessary to imple-
ment its civil justice expense and delay reduction
plan. The Judicial Conference may provide such re-
sources out of funds appropriated pursuant to section
106(a) [Pub. L. 101–650, title I, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat.
5098].
‘‘(3) Within 18 months after the date of the enact-
ment of this title [Dec. 1, 1990], the Judicial Con-
ference shall prepare a report on the plans developed
and implemented by the Early Implementation Dis-
trict Courts.
‘‘(4) The Director of the Administrative Office of
the United States Courts shall transmit to the United
States district courts and to the Committees on the
Judiciary of the Senate and House of Representa-
tives—
‘‘(A) copies of the plans developed and imple-
mented by the Early Implementation District
Courts;
‘‘(B) summaries of the reports submitted by such
district courts pursuant to section 472(d) of title 28,
United States Code, as added by subsection (a); and
‘‘(C) the report prepared in accordance with para-
graph (3) of this subsection.’’
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
Pub. L. 101–650, title I, § 104, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5097,
as amended by Pub. L. 104–33, § 1, Oct. 3, 1995, 109 Stat.
Page 164
TITLE 28—JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
§ 472
292; Pub. L. 104–317, title VI, § 608(a), Oct. 19, 1996, 110
Stat. 3860, provided that:
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—(1) During the 5-year period begin-
ning on January 1, 1991, the Judicial Conference of the
United States shall conduct a demonstration program
in accordance with subsection (b).
‘‘(2) A district court participating in the demonstra-
tion program may also be an Early Implementation
District Court under section 103(c) [set out above].
‘‘(b) PROGRAM REQUIREMENT.—(1) The United States
District Court for the Western District of Michigan and
the United States District Court for the Northern Dis-
trict of Ohio shall experiment with systems of differen-
tiated case management that provide specifically for
the assignment of cases to appropriate processing
tracks that operate under distinct and explicit rules,
procedures, and timeframes for the completion of dis-
covery and for trial.
‘‘(2) The United States District Court for the North-
ern District of California, the United States District
Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, and
the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of Missouri shall experiment with various meth-
ods of reducing cost and delay in civil litigation, in-
cluding alternative dispute resolution, that such dis-
trict courts and the Judicial Conference of the United
States shall select.
‘‘(c) STUDY OF RESULTS.—The Judicial Conference of
the United States, in consultation with the Director of
the Federal Judicial Center and the Director of the Ad-
ministrative Office of the United States Courts, shall
study the experience of the district courts under the
demonstration program.
‘‘(d) REPORT.—Not later than June 30, 1997, the Judi-
cial Conference of the United States shall transmit to
the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and the
House of Representatives a report of the results of the
demonstration program.’’
PILOT PROGRAM
Pub. L. 101–650, title I, § 105, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5097,
as amended by Pub. L. 103–420, § 4, Oct. 25, 1994, 108 Stat.
4345; Pub. L. 104–317, title VI, § 608(b), Oct. 19, 1996, 110
Stat. 3860, provided that:
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—(1) During the 5-year period begin-
ning on January 1, 1991, the Judicial Conference of the
United States shall conduct a pilot program in accord-
ance with subsection (b).
‘‘(2) A district court participating in the pilot pro-
gram shall be designated as an Early Implementation
District Court under section 103(c) [set out above].
‘‘(b) PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS.—(1) Ten district courts
(in this section referred to as ‘Pilot Districts’) des-
ignated by the Judicial Conference of the United States
shall implement expense and delay reduction plans
under chapter 23 of title 28, United States Code (as
added by section 103(a)), not later than December 31,
1991. In addition to complying with all other applicable
provisions of chapter 23 of title 28, United States Code
(as added by section 103(a)), the expense and delay re-
duction plans implemented by the Pilot Districts shall
include the 6 principles and guidelines of litigation
management and cost and delay reduction identified in
section 473(a) of title 28, United States Code.
‘‘(2) At least 5 of the Pilot Districts designated by the
Judicial Conference shall be judicial districts encom-
passing metropolitan areas.
‘‘(3) The expense and delay reduction plans imple-
mented by the Pilot Districts shall remain in effect for
a period of 4 years. At the end of that 4-year period, the
Pilot Districts shall no longer be required to include, in
their expense and delay reduction plans, the 6 prin-
ciples and guidelines of litigation management and
cost and delay reduction described in paragraph (1).
‘‘(c) PROGRAM STUDY REPORT.—(1) Not later than
June 30, 1997, the Judicial Conference shall submit to
the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and
House of Representatives a report on the results of the
pilot program under this section that includes an as-
sessment of the extent to which costs and delays were
reduced as a result of the program. The report shall
compare those results to the impact on costs and
delays in ten comparable judicial districts for which
the application of section 473(a) of title 28, United
States Code, had been discretionary. That comparison
shall be based on a study conducted by an independent
organization with expertise in the area of Federal court
management.
‘‘(2)(A) The Judicial Conference shall include in its
report a recommendation as to whether some or all dis-
trict courts should be required to include, in their ex-
pense and delay reduction plans, the 6 principles and
guidelines of litigation management and cost and delay
reduction identified in section 473(a) of title 28, United
States Code.
‘‘(B) If the Judicial Conference recommends in its re-
port that some or all district courts be required to in-
clude such principles and guidelines in their expense
and delay reduction plans, the Judicial Conference
shall initiate proceedings for the prescription of rules
implementing its recommendation, pursuant to chapter
131 of title 28, United States Code.
‘‘(C) If in its report the Judicial Conference does not
recommend an expansion of the pilot program under
subparagraph (A), the Judicial Conference shall iden-
tify alternative, more effective cost and delay reduc-
tion programs that should be implemented in light of
the findings of the Judicial Conference in its report,
and the Judicial Conference may initiate proceedings
for the prescription of rules implementing its rec-
ommendation, pursuant to chapter 131 of title 28,
United States Code.’’
§ 472. Development and implementation of a civil
justice expense and delay reduction plan
(a) The civil justice expense and delay reduc-
tion plan implemented by a district court shall
be developed or selected, as the case may be,
after consideration of the recommendations of
an advisory group appointed in accordance with
section 478 of this title.
(b) The advisory group of a United States dis-
trict court shall submit to the court a report,
which shall be made available to the public and
which shall include—
(1) an assessment of the matters referred to
in subsection (c)(1);
(2) the basis for its recommendation that the
district court develop a plan or select a model
plan;
(3) recommended measures, rules and pro-
grams; and
(4) an explanation of the manner in which
the recommended plan complies with section
473 of this title.
(c)(1) In developing its recommendations, the
advisory group of a district court shall promptly
complete a thorough assessment of the state of
the court’s civil and criminal dockets. In per-
forming the assessment for a district court, the
advisory group shall—
(A) determine the condition of the civil and
criminal dockets;
(B) identify trends in case filings and in the
demands being placed on the court’s resources;
(C) identify the principal causes of cost and
delay in civil litigation, giving consideration
to such potential causes as court procedures
and the ways in which litigants and their at-
torneys approach and conduct litigation; and
(D) examine the extent to which costs and
delays could be reduced by a better assessment
of the impact of new legislation on the courts.
(2) In developing its recommendations, the ad-
visory group of a district court shall take into
Cross-references
Connections may be documented source relationships, shared citations or nearby passages. Each explains its basis; a connection alone does not establish applicability to your situation.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
There shall be implemented by each United States district court, in accordance with this chapter, a civil justice expense and delay reduction plan. The plan may be a plan developed by such district court or a model plan developed by the Judicial Conference of the United States. The purposes of each plan are to facilitate deliberate adjudication of civil cases on the merits, monitor discovery, improve litigation management, and ensure just, speedy, and inexpensive resolutions of civil disputes.
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 28 U.S.C. § 471
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Same stored citation; legal effect and authority still require review.