About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

34 Rev. Litig. 641 (2015)
The AALS Litigation Section's Program on the Future of Discovery

handle is hein.journals/rol34 and id is 667 raw text is: Introduction: The AALS Litigation Section's Program on The Future of Discovery Ronald G. Aronovsky* I am delighted to write this Introduction to a fine collection of papers about discovery appearing in this issue of the Review of Litigation. These papers were generated in connection with the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) Section on Litigation program on The Future of Discovery held at the 2015 AALS Annual Meeting. In many respects, discovery is the lynch-pin of modem U.S. civil litigation systems. Discovery can facilitate a streamlined role for pleading, provide the opportunity for reducing informational asymmetry between parties, enhance informed settlement negotiations, and set the stage for the pre-trial disposition of weak claims or defenses through summary judgment. But discovery is also controversial. Some maintain that broad and robust discovery is essential to ensure meaningful access to justice and the resolution of disputes on their merits. Others criticize current discovery practice as a hyper-technical and needlessly intrusive, time-consuming, and expensive process that inflates transaction costs and undermines Rule 1 's command that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) be administered to secure the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.' In many ways, these disputes about the proper role of discovery reflect underlying disagreements about the appropriate structure of the civil litigation system and can operate as a surrogate battlefield regarding the availability of courts to vindicate or elucidate public law rights. These tensions also demonstrate that a meaningful discussion about the future of discovery cannot be conducted in isolation, but rather with a healthy regard for discovery's potential impact on broader dispute resolution values implicit in this debate. For decades, these competing views have dominated much of the discussion about discovery among practitioners, judges and academics, particularly when coincident with proposed changes to * Professor of Law, Southwestern Law School. J.D., 1980, University of California, Berkeley. A.B., 1977, University of California, Berkeley. The author served as the 2009 Chair of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) Section on Litigation and the 2012 Chair of the AALS Section on Alternative Dispute Resolution. 1. FED. R. CIv. P. 1.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most