Latest Updates
Federal Updates
Arizona: state, federal
California: state, federal
Connecticut: state, federal
Delaware: state, federal
District of Columbia: state, federal
Florida: state, federal
Georgia: state, federal
Illinois: state, federal
Maine: state, federal
Maryland: state, federal
Massachusetts: state, federal
Missouri: state, federal
Nevada: state, federal
New Jersey: state, federal
New York: state, federal
Ohio: state, federal
Pennsylvania: state, federal
South Carolina: state, federal
Texas: state, federal
Virginia: state, federal
Washington: state, federal

1 through 15, out of 166 | First | Prev | Next | Last

Effective July 1, 2008, most California counties amended their local rules, and the California Judicial Council amended the California Rules of Court. Please check your California SmartRules guides for the latest amendments affecting your practice.

SmartRules received notice of a change to civil ex parte procedure from the Riverside County Superior Court. A summary of the changes is provided below. Please contact SmartRules for further information or a complete copy of the court’s notice.

Effective June 16, 2008, the court’s judicial secretaries are no longer setting requests for ex parte relief, and hearing dates will no longer be reserved.

Requests for ex parte relief are to be submitted for filing at the ex parte counter in the clerk’s office (located at the attorney counter). All ex parte hearings for trial settings, continuing a trial, or requests for preference cases will be set in Department 1 at 8:30 a.m. All other ex parte hearings will be set in Department 2 at 8:30 a.m. Upon presentation of ex parte paperwork, the hearing will be set for the following day.

If the court determines that the moving party has not established good cause for ex parte relief and denies the ex parte request, the courtroom assistant will contact the moving party to let them know that their request was denied and that the hearing will not proceed. The moving party will be required to advise the opposing party of the denial and that the hearing has been taken off calendar.

Effective July 1, 2008, the Illinois Supreme Court amended its Supreme Court Rules 343 (Times for Filing and Serving Briefs), 716 (Limited Admission of House Counsel) and 756 (Registration and Fees). For the full redlined text of the amended rules, please see [url] http://www.state.il.us/court/SupremeCourt/Rules/Amend/2008/032608.pdf[/url] .

Effective May 20, 2008, the Illinois Supreme Court amended its Rule 721, (Professional Service Corporations, Professional Associations, Limited Liability Companies, and Registered Limited Liability Partnerships for the Practice of Law). For more information, please see [url] http://www.state.il.us/court/SupremeCourt/Rules/Amend/2008/052008.pdf[/url] .

Effective May 30, 2008, Supreme Court Rules 2, 23, 101, 107, 108,110, 216, 224, 291, 303, 324, 325, 526, 602, and 712, and the “Medical Malpractice Interrogatories to Defendant Doctor” standard interrogatories under Rule 213 are amended, and effective September 1, 2008, Supreme Court Rule 296 will be amended. For more information, please see [url] http://www.state.il.us/court/SupremeCourt/Rules/Amend/2008/053008.pdf[/url] .

Effective June 1, 2008, Maine amended its Rules of Civil Procedure 7(b)(1) and 55.

Effective August 1, 2008, Maine will amend its Rules of Evidence 413 and 503; its Rules of Civil Procedure 7, 16, 26, 33, 34, 37 and 89; and its Rules of Appellate Procedure 12 and 14.

More information is available at http://www.courts.state.me.us/news/index.shtml.

Effective May 16, 2008, Uniform Rules 207.4, (Surrogate’s Court E-filing Pilot Program Rules), 208.4 (Civil Court Electronic Filing Pilot Program) and 202.5 (Electronic Filing Rules for the Supreme Court) were amended. For more information, please see http://nycourts.gov/rules/amendments.shtml.

Effective July 1, 2008, Ohio State Court amended its court rules as follows:

Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure (21, 22, 25.1, and 43)
Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure (4, 16, 26, 33, 34, 36, 37, 45, and 86)
Ohio Rules of Criminal Procedure (10, 24, 43, and 59)

The full text of the amendments can be viewed at: http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/Rules/.

The Pennsylvania Unified Judicial System has posted proposed amendments to Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 3281 (re fixing value of real property) and 2951(a) (re confession of judgment). Comments are due by August 22 and August 15, 2008, respectively. For the full text of the proposed amendments, please see http://origin-www.aopc.org/Index/supctcmtes/civilrulescmte/indexcivilrules.asp.

Most California superior courts revise their local rules twice a year, effective July 1 and January 1. Most counties also post proposed revisions some months in advance for public comment.
Santa Clara County has posted proposed revisions to its local rules effective July 1, 2008. For more information please see http://www.sccsuperiorcourt.org/rules/rules.htm.
Ventura County has posted proposed revisions to its local rules effective July 1, 2008. For more information please see http://www.ventura.courts.ca.gov/index.htm.

Effective March 1, 2008, Massachusetts made changes to its Rules of Civil Procedure. For more information, please see http://www.lawlib.state.ma.us/civrules.html.
Effective April 1, 2008, there is a new version of Massachusetts Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(5). For the full text of the amended rule please see http://www.lawlib.state.ma.us/civrules.html.

Ohio State Court has posted proposed amendments to its state court rules as follows:
Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure (21, 22, 25.1, and 43)
Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure (4, 16, 26, 33, 34, 36, 37, 45, and 86)
Ohio Rules of Criminal Procedure (10, 24, 43, and 59)
The full text of the proposed amendments can be viewed at: http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/Rules/. If adopted, and after a review and discussion process, the changes will take effect on July 1, 2008.
Effective April 14, 2008, the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas will amend its Local Rule 23, re criminal case management. For the full text of the amended rule please see http://cp.cuyahogacounty.us/internet/ID-1-Type-Amend-news.aspx.

The Pennsylvania Unified Judicial System has posted a proposed amendment to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 240 Re in Forma Pauperis. The comment period has ended. For more information, please see http://origin-www.aopc.org/Index/supctcmtes/civilrulescmte/indexcivilrules.asp.

Effective January 1, 2008 Arizona made substantial changes to its Rules of Civil Procedure and some changes to its Rules of Procedure for the Juvenile Court. The full text of the changes can be viewed at: http://www.supreme.state.az.us/rules/rarulciv.htm.

Effective January 1, 2008, Yuma County Superior Court amended its local rules. To see the full text of the amended rules: http://www.supreme.state.az.us/rules/ramrule2.htm.

Most California Superior Courts amend their local rules every year, effective January 1st. (Some courts also amend rules effective July 1st .) This year was no exception. Most counties have made amendments to their local rules and SmartRules� procedural guides have been amended to reflect the changes in every county.

Additionally, the Judicial Council has promulgated a new uniform fee schedule, and the California Rules of Court were amended effective January 1, 2008. Notable changes include:

New Uniform Fee Schedule

Each superior court began collecting the new, revised, and clarified fees effective January 1, 2008. The full version of the new schedule is available at: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/presscenter/newsreleases/NR46-03.HTM. Important changes to mandatory fees include: New fees for amending small claims filings; New fees for amending complaints and cross-complaints in limited civil cases; New fees for writ of petition in limited civil cases; Revised fees for appeals in limited civil cases; Clarification of when fees do or do not apply in various probate filings; and Change in the payment of the graduated probate fees.

California Rules of Court

* CRC 1.20, Filing. New subsection (b) regarding protection of privacy. For more information, see SmartRules� procedural guide: GENERALLY APPLICABLE RULES AND FORMATTING.
* CRC 1.200, Format of Citations. New rule setting forth citation requirements. For more information, see SmartRules� procedural guide: GENERALLY APPLICABLE RULES AND FORMATTING.
* CRC 2.256, Responsibilities of Electronic Filer and CRC 2.260 Electronic Service. For more information, see SmartRules� procedural guide: FILING DOCUMENTS and MOTIONS, OPPOSITIONS AND REPLIES.
* CRC 2.306, Service of Papers by Fax Transmission. Added new subsection (b), renumbered all the other subsections. For more information, see SmartRules� procedural guide: FILING DOCUMENTS.
* CRC 3.670, Telephone Appearance. Added new subsection (a), rule now strongly encourages courts to allow telephonic appearance, all other subsections renumbered and additional amendments were made. For more information, see SmartRules� procedural guide: NOTICE OF TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE.

The State of Connecticut Judicial Branch website has posted changes to the Rules of Professional Conduct, General Provisions of Superior Court Rules, Civil Rules, Family Rules, Criminal Rules, Practice Book Forms and Code of Evidence. Most changes were effective January 1, 2008, but some changes were effective earlier:

For the full text of the changes go to the Judicial Branch website at: http://www.jud.ct.gov/pb.htm.

The Delaware Court of Chancery issued a standing order requiring that effective December 3, 2007, all pleadings or other filings with the Court of Chancery shall carry the designation �IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE� and shall not reflect the county where filed. For a the complete text of the order please see, http://courts.state.de.us/Rules/?ChanceryStandingOrder110807.pdf.

The court also ordered that effective December 3, 2007 certain matters be filed and docketed as civil actions (and not as civil miscellaneous matters). For the full text of the order please see, http://courts.state.de.us/Rules/?ChanceryRevAmenStandingOrder112007.pdf.

Finally, the court ordered that commencing December 3, 2007, all e-filed documents in the Court of Chancery, whether filed as civil actions or as civil miscellaneous matters, shall be limited to 10 megabytes per document and 25 megabytes per total transaction. For the full text of the order please see, http://courts.state.de.us/Rules/?ChanceryStandingOrder111907.pdf.

1 through 15, out of 166 | First | Prev | Next | Last