the reasons that the non-movant believes the motion should be denied.the reasons that the movant believes those issues are legally meritorious.whether the parties could resolve all or some of those issues without a motion.the issues that the movant intends to raise in the motion to dismiss.

While in-person meetings are at least temporarily not feasible, I strongly encourage counsel to pick up the phone, or even better, have a videoconference call, to discuss: 5 To encourage communication between opposing counsel, I request that the parties meet and confer in good faith and a meaningful waybefore filing a motion to dismiss. These motions to dismiss rarely result in a complaint being fully dismissed with prejudice but commonly create unwarranted filings that largely consume judges’ and law clerks’ time.Įffective December 1, 2019, I revised my practice standards to try to improve dispositive motions practice in civil cases by incorporating the IAALS recommendations for making the pretrial dispositive motions process more efficient. The replacement of “notice” pleading required by Federal Rule 8(a) with the Twombly/Iqbal “plausibility standard” 4 has resulted in a common trend I have witnessed on the federal bench: motions to dismiss that are quickly followed by a motion to amend the complaint with a proposed amended complaint attached that either eliminates claims or amplifies allegations of fact-or both. It can also be cause for delay, a burden on the court, and costly to parties. Motions practice can be a critical part of the prosecution or defense of a case. Motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment filings have become routine in most civil cases, whether or not there is a realistic possibility of success. Brooke Jackson, US District Court for the District of Colorado Courts and attorneys are encouraged to review the report’s recommendations, along wi th the judges’ practice standards and suggestions below, and rethink dispositive motions practice in civil litigation. The IAALS report contains more than just a collection of best practices it calls for the bench and bar to actively engage in a more targeted and focused approach to dispositive motions to better serve clients and the system.

Much of this advice is drawn from a 2019 report from the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (IAALS report), 3 which examined civil dispositive motions practice by conducting empirical research and identifying opportunities for improvement and innovation. In this article, a federal district court judge and a state district court judge share advice for attorneys navigating dispositive motions practice. But when attorneys file motions reflexively and courts do not thoughtfully manage or timely rule on them, such motions inject additional cost and delay into court systems across the country, ultimately undermining access to justice for all. Dispositive motions, when used appropriately, can save courts and litigants time and money. Motions practice-as much as discovery-plays a critical role in making the civil process more efficient and less costly, especially now that court resources are at capacity.

While past civil reform efforts emphasized proportionality in discovery and early case management rule changes, discovery is only part of a civil case’s lifecycle. Simultaneously, courts are now facing a backlog of cases filed pre-pandemic while also preparing for newly filed or soon-to-be-filed lawsuits.Ĭourts, judges, and attorneys have a unique opportunity right now to seize on federal and state courts’ ability to embrace change quickly and to make the civil litigation process more efficient for all. 1 Courts continue to issue orders based on new public health information and new court operations protocols. Starting in March 2020, both federal and state courts in Colorado issued orders continuing civil and criminal trials, allowed telephone hearings and videoconferences in lieu of in-person hearings, and prioritized essential matters. Colorado’s federal and state courts continue to adapt to challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic that are rooted in preserving constitutional rights and protecting public health and safety.

12 b 6 motion to dismiss sample