Pursuant to the authority vested in me, and upon the advice and
consent of the Administrative Board of the Courts, I hereby add,
effective immediately, a new section 202.69 of the Uniform Civil
Rules of the Supreme and County Courts, relating to coordination of
related actions in more than one judicial district, to read as
follows:
Section
202.69 Coordination of Related Actions Pending in More than One
Judicial District.
(a)
Application. This section shall apply
when related actions are pending in the courts of the Unified Court
System in more than one judicial district and it may be appropriate
for these actions to be coordinated pursuant to the criteria and
procedures set forth in this section. Coordination pursuant to this
section shall apply to pretrial proceedings, including dispositive
motions.
(b)
Litigation Coordinating Panel.
(1)
Composition. The Chief Administrator of
the Courts, in consultation with the Presiding Justice of each
Appellate Division, shall create a Litigation Coordinating Panel
composed of one justice of the Supreme Court from each judicial
department of the state.
(2)
Procedure. The Panel shall determine,
sua sponte or upon application of a party to an action, a justice
before whom such an action is pending, or an administrative judge,
whether the related actions should be coordinated before one or more
individual justices. The Panel shall provide notice and an
opportunity to be heard to all parties to the actions sought to be
coordinated and shall inform the justices before whom such actions
are pending of the initiation of proceedings before the Panel.
(3)
Standards for Coordination. In
determining whether to issue an administrative order of
coordination, the Panel shall consider, among other things, the
complexity of the actions; whether common questions of fact or law
exist, and the importance of such questions to the determination of
the issues; the risk that coordination may unreasonably delay the
progress, increase the expense, or complicate the processing of any
action or otherwise prejudice a party; the risk of duplicative or
inconsistent rulings, orders or judgments; the convenience of the
parties, witnesses and counsel; whether coordinated discovery would
be advantageous; efficient utilization of judicial resources and the
facilities and personnel of the court; the manageability of a
coordinated litigation; whether issues of insurance, limits on
assets and potential bankruptcy can be best addressed in coordinated
proceedings; and the pendency of related matters in the federal
courts and in the courts of other states. The Panel may exclude
particular actions from an otherwise applicable order of
coordination when necessary to protect the rights of parties.
(4)
Determination.
(i)
The Panel shall issue a written decision on each application. If the
Panel determines to direct coordination, it shall issue an
administrative order identifying the actions that shall be
coordinated. The order may address actions subsequently filed or not
otherwise then before the Panel.
(ii)
The order of the Panel shall specify the number of Coordinating
Justices and the county or counties in which the coordinated
proceedings shall take place. In making this decision, the Panel
shall consider, among other things, the venues of origin of the
cases to be coordinated; whether the actions arise out of an
accident or events in a particular county; judicial caseloads in
prospective venues; fairness to parties; the convenience of the
parties and witnesses; the convenience of counsel; and whether the
purposes of this section can best be advanced by coordination before
more than one Coordinating Justice.
(c)
Coordinating Justice.
(1)
Designation. The Administrative Judge
charged with supervision of the local jurisdiction within which
coordinated proceedings are to take place shall select the
Coordinating Justice or Justices, in consultation with the
appropriate Deputy Chief Administrative Judge. In deciding whom to
designate, the Administrative Judge shall consider, among other
things, the existing caseload of each prospective appointee and the
overall needs of the court in which that justice serves; the
familiarity of that justice with the litigation at issue; the
justice's managerial ability; and the previous experience of the
justice with the field of law involved and with coordinated
litigation. The Administrative Judge may designate a justice from
another local jurisdiction as a Coordinating Justice with the
approval of the Administrative Judge thereof.
(2)
Authority. The Coordinating Justice
shall have authority to make any order consistent with this section
and its purposes, including to remand to the court of origin any
portion of a case not properly subject to coordination under the
administrative order of the Panel; assign a master caption; create a
central case file and docket; establish a service list; periodically
issue case management orders after consultation with counsel;
appoint and define the roles of steering committees and counsel of
parties and liaison counsel, provided that the committees and
counsel shall not deprive any party of substantive rights; issue
protective orders pursuant to Article 31 of the Civil Practice Law
and Rules; establish a document depository; direct the parties to
prepare coordinated pleadings and deem service upon liaison counsel
or steering committee service upon the respective parties; require
service of uniform requests for disclosure and establish a uniform
method for the conduct of physical and mental examinations; rule
upon all motions; require the parties to participate in settlement
discussions and court-annexed alternative dispute resolution; and
try any part of any coordinated case on consent of the parties to
that action.
(3)
Coordination with Federal or Other States 'Actions. If
actions related to those pending before a Coordinating Justice are
proceeding in federal courts or in the courts of other states, the
Coordinating Justice shall consult with the presiding judge(s) in an
effort to advance the purposes of this section. Where appropriate,
the Coordinating Justice, while respecting the rights of parties
under the Civil Practice Law and Rules, may require that discovery
in the cases coordinated pursuant to this section proceed jointly or
in coordination with discovery in the federal or other states'
actions.
(d)
Termination of Coordination. The
Coordinating Justice, sua sponte or upon motion by any party, may
terminate coordination, in whole or in part, if the Justice
determines that coordination has been completed or that the purposes
of this section can be best advanced by termination of the
coordination. Upon termination, the actions shall be remanded to
their counties of origin for trial unless the parties to an action
consent to trial of that action before the Coordinating Justice.
Dated:
January 24, 2002
|
JONATHAN
LIPPMAN
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE
JUDGE OF THE COURTS |
