On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Current Developments in Federal Civil Practice 2017

Released on: Feb. 23, 2017
Running Time: 06:20:07

Are you up-to-date on the important developments in federal civil practice and the implications of these developments for your cases? In Current Developments in Federal Civil Practice 2017, a distinguished faculty of trial lawyers and judges will provide a dynamic overview of significant recent developments in the law and offer their insights.  The program will focus on the impact of these developments on best practices throughout the life of a federal litigation.

You will learn:

  • New developments, best practices, and strategies in motion practice
  • Evidence update
  • Recent decisions interpreting and applying the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence
  • Notable ethical considerations in federal litigation practice
  • Trial issues, including effective use of  experts and evidence, social media, and jury instructions
  • The “View from the Bench” – insight from federal judges on what they consider to be effective practices in pretrial proceedings and at trial

This program will be helpful for any attorney who litigates in federal court.  Both new lawyers and experienced trial attorneys will appreciate the focus on recent developments and decisions, and the opportunity to hear the views of federal judges on these issues.


Lecture Topics [Total time 06:20:07]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.


  • Introduction* [00:05:43]
    Lauren E. Aguiar
  • Motion Practice Developments in Federal Civil Practice [01:02:47]
    Sandra S. Park, Hon. James L. Cott, Hon. Cheryl L. Pollak, Jonathan L. Frank, Lauren E. Aguiar
  • Federal Civil Practice Discovery Update [01:03:24]
    Hon. James L. Cott, Hon. Cheryl L. Pollak, Stephen D. Whetstone, Jonathan L. Frank, Lauren E. Aguiar
  • Evidence Developments in Federal Civil Practice [01:00:03]
    Jacob Hollinger, Hon. James L. Cott, Hon. Cheryl L. Pollak, Jonathan L. Frank, Lauren E. Aguiar
  • Ethics Developments in Federal Civil Practice [01:06:19]
    Jerome G. Snider, Hon. George B. Daniels, Hon. Steven I. Locke, Jonathan L. Frank, Lauren E. Aguiar
  • Important Recent Cases Impacting Federal Civil Practice [01:00:20]
    Lauren E. Aguiar, Hon. George B. Daniels, Hon. Steven I. Locke, Jonathan L. Frank
  • Current Trial Issues in Federal Civil Practice [01:01:31]
    Anne L. Clark, Hon. George B. Daniels, Hon. Steven I. Locke, Jonathan L. Frank, Lauren E. Aguiar

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:


  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Motion Practice Developments and Update (November 29, 2016)
    Sandra S. Park
  • Federal Civil Practice Discovery Update: Selected Cases
    Scott Brown
  • Evidence Update (November 28, 2016)
    Jacob Hollinger
  • Ethics Developments in Federal Civil Practice (November 14, 2016)
    Jerome G. Snider
  • Important Case Law Developments in Civil Practice (November 30, 2016)
    Jonathan L. Frank, Lauren E. Aguiar
  • Internet and Social Media Use During Trial (December 2016)
    Anne L. Clark

Presentation Material


  • Motion Practice Developments
    Sandra S. Park
  • Current Developments in Federal Civil Practice: Discovery and the Federal Rules
    Stephen D. Whetstone
  • Evidence Update
    Jacob Hollinger
  • United States v. Iverson
  • Ethics Update
    Jerome G. Snider
  • Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County
  • The Estate of Francis P. Kennedy v. Rosenblatt
  • Case Law Developments: Current Developments in Federal Civil Practice 2017
    Lauren E. Aguiar, Jonathan L. Frank
Chairperson(s)
Lauren E. Aguiar ~ Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Speaker(s)
Anne L. Clark ~ Vladeck, Raskin & Clark, P.C.
Hon. James L. Cott ~ United States Magistrate Judge, United States District Court, Southern District of New York
Hon. George B. Daniels ~ United States District Judge, United States District Court, Southern District of New York
Jonathan L. Frank ~ Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Jacob Hollinger ~ McDermott Will & Emery LLP
Hon. Steven I. Locke ~ United States Magistrate Judge, United States District Court, Eastern District of New York
Sandra S. Park ~ Senior Staff Attorney, American Civil Liberties Union
Hon. Cheryl L. Pollak ~ United States Magistrate Judge, United States District Court, Eastern District of New York
Jerome G. Snider ~ Professional Responsibility Counsel, Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Stephen D. Whetstone ~ Executive Managing Director, Electronic Discovery & Disclosure Leader, Stroz Friedberg
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-traditional” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of non-traditional programs per reporting period.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 3 on-demand credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “A/V” credit. Attorneys are limited to 22.5 credits of A/V programs per reporting period.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as “QAS Self-Study” credit. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

 

Related Items

Live Programs  Live Programs

Current Developments in Federal Civil Practice 2018 (New York, NY) Feb. 15, 2018

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

Current Developments in Federal Civil Practice 2018  
Current Developments in Federal Civil Practice 2017 Lauren E Aguiar, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
 
Share
Email
“I liked seeing the diversity of the panelists… This has been one of my favorite PLI courses I have ever taken.”
2016 Attendee

“This was an excellent and interesting program.”
2016 Attendee


  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • GooglePlus
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2017 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2017 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.