Metro Atlanta Business Court 2016 Annual Report

Similar documents
Lawyer Views on Mandatory Arbitration

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA

Professional liability

CASE EVALUATION AND JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE DO NOT MIX: PROCEED WITH CAUTION

Trial Lawyers Committed to Excellence

MAGISTRATE JUDGE MONA K. MAJZOUB SCHEDULING DOCUMENTS 3/28/2011

An Insider s View on Multi-Jurisdictional Litigation. Armando Carlo III. The Boeing Company. 100 N Riverside Chicago, IL John G.

PREPARING FOR ARBITRATION ARBITRATION BEFORE FINRA

D. Brian Hufford. Partner

Examinations for discovery Income Tax Act. Examinations for discovery Excise Tax Act. Consideration on application. Mandatory examination

KAO LAW ASSOCIATES ATTORNEYS AT LAW

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM v. Case No. 5D

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS, AFL-CIO, CLC PENSION ASSISTANCE AND LITIGATION POLICY ADOPTED 2011

FIDUCIARY LIABILITY COVERAGE PART

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

Uniform Rules of Practice Circuit Court of Illinois Nineteenth Judicial Circuit

Supreme Court of Florida

A. Administration means one or more of the following administrative duties or activities with respect to a Plan:

SECTION 1 OF: SESSION LAW SENATE BILL 277

ERISA. Representative Experience

Presented by Howard S. Shafer Shafer Glazer LLP. July 23, 2013

PERSONAL CUSTODIAL ACCOUNT AGREEMENT

401(k) Fee Litigation Update

RESOLUTION NO RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE VECTOR CONTROL JOINT POWERS AGENCY REVISING THE LITIGATION MANAGEMENT POLICY

Employment Practices Liability for Law Firms

The Renaissance Centre, Suite North King Street Wilmington, DE Phone: Fax:

FIDUCIARY LIABILITY COVERAGE PART

REGULATIONS OF THE CLIENTS' SECURITY FUND

THIS NOTICE MAY AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT OR THE COURT CLERK REGARDING THIS MATTER

IN RE: MEDIATION MANDATORY MEDIATION CIRCUIT COURT BREVARD COUNTY OWNER OCCUPIED RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE

EDWARD JONES ADVISORY SOLUTIONS Unified Managed Account (UMA) Models Client Services Agreement

Benson E. Pope. Focus Areas. Overview

Q UPDATE EXECUTIVE RISK SOLUTIONS CASES OF INTEREST D&O FILINGS, SETTLEMENTS AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTS

CLAIMS AGAINST INDUSTRIAL HYGIENISTS: THE TRILOGY OF PREVENTION, HANDLING AND RESOLUTION PART TWO: WHAT TO DO WHEN A CLAIM HAPPENS

UCB, Inc. Defined Benefit Pension Plan Litigation NOTICE OF PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

69J Mediation of Residential Property Insurance Claims. (1) Purpose and Scope. This rule implements Section , F.S.

( ). See MyBestBuy.com for current rules.

Procedures for Protest to New York State and City Tribunals

Part VIII RULES GOVERNING PRACTICE IN THE TAX COURT OF NEW JERSEY TABLE OF CONTENTS

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Public Agency Risk Sharing Authority of California. Liability Program CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR REQUIREMENTS

The Republic of China Arbitration Law

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT HOCKING COUNTY

29.99% This A P R will vary with the market based on the Prime Rate.

Illinois Association of Defense Trial Counsel P.O. Box 7288, Springfield, IL IDC Quarterly Vol. 15, No. 3 ( ) Medical Malpractice

MEMORY BANK ACCOUNT RULES (continued)

Procedural Considerations For Insurance Coverage Declaratory Judgment Actions

Administrative Law Advanced Florida Bar Studies Advanced Legal Research (Skills) Advanced Trademark and Copyright Alternative Dispute Resolution

Directors, Officers and Corporate Liability Insurance Coverage Section

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

Illinois General Assembly passes historic medical malpractice reform bill

Executive Protection Policy

Specimen. Private Company Management Liability Insurance Policy Employment Practices Liability Coverage Part ( EPLI Coverage Part )

Case 3:09-cv N-BQ Document 201 Filed 05/16/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID 3204

Case 1:14-cv DPW Document 2 Filed 04/08/14 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

(MCYDSNB922TC0618COB-COM) DEPARTMENT STORES NATIONAL BANK CREDIT CARD DISCLOSURES % This APR will vary with the market based on the Prime Rate.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) THIS MATTER came before the Court on Plaintiff s motion for preliminary approval of

EDWARD JONES GUIDED SOLUTIONS Flex Account Client Services Agreement

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D

Decided: April 20, S15Q0418. PIEDMONT OFFICE REALTY TRUST, INC. v. XL SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY.

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

PREEMPTION QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Can an Insurance Company Write a Reservation of Rights Letter that Actually Protects Their Right to Deny Coverage in Light of Advantage Buildings?

Yugraneft v. Rexx Management: Limitation periods under the New York Convention A Case Comment by Paul M. Lalonde & Mark Hines*

DELL SERVICE CONTRACT TAX REFUND CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ( SBE Settlement )

2018 PA Super 45. Appeal from the Order entered March 29, 2017 In the Court of Common Pleas of Chester County Civil Division at No: CT

SEC. 5. SMALL CASE PROCEDURE FOR REQUESTING COMPETENT AUTHORITY ASSISTANCE.01 General.02 Small Case Standards.03 Small Case Filing Procedure

Directors and Officers Liability Excess and Drop Down Non- Indemnified Loss Policy

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

MDG PURCHASE BENEFIT CLUB MEMBER PRIVILEGES & CONDITIONS

ORIGINATOR AGREEMENT

NOTICE OF PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

SECTION 5. SMALL CASE PROCEDURE FOR REQUESTING COMPETENT AUTHORITY ASSISTANCE.01 General.02 Small Case Standards.03 Small Case Filing Procedure

FOLLOWING FORM EXCESS FIDUCIARY AND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT INDEMNITY POLICY

Click to edit Master title style

Approximately 1.8 million litigants appear in the New York State courts annually

SPECIMEN. Power Source SM Employment Practices Liability Coverage Section

Benson E. Pope. Focus Areas. Overview

ForeFront Portfolio SM For Not-for-Profit Organizations Directors & Officers. Insuring Clauses

Wrap+ for Health Care Organizations

ABA Employers Edge SM An Employment Practices Liability Insurance Policy for Law Firms Endorsed by the American Bar Association

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

HOW THE 1998 TAX ACT AFFECTS YOUR DEALINGS WITH THE IRS APPEALS OFFICE. The IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998.

The Minnesota Workers Compensation Assigned Risk Plan (MWCARP) Legal Defense Services Request For Proposals

Administrative Order

CURRICULUM VITAE. University of California at Santa Barbara, Bachelor of Arts - Political Science 1975

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO CA APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ATTALA COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY. THIS NOTICE MAY AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS.

DELL SERVICE CONTRACT TAX SETTLEMENT ( Dell Settlement )

Arbitration Forums, Inc. Rules

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

ELIOT M. HARRIS MEMBER. Eliot M. Harris

EDWARD JONES GUIDED SOLUTIONS Flex Account Client Services Agreement

LLM in Taxation. Required Courses

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Arbitration Act (Tentative translation)

Bradley University, Peoria, IL, Bachelors of Arts in English, cum laude, 1999 Editor-in-Chief, Broadside: Arts & Literary Journal

Best Practices in Arbitration for Hospitality Cases

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

Transcription:

2016 Metro Atlanta Business Court 2016 Annual Report 1 Fulton County Superior Court

Governing Rules On June 3, 2005, the Supreme Court of Georgia promulgated Atlanta Judicial Circuit Rule 1004 governing the procedures of the Business Court, as amended on June 6, 2007, May 6, 2009, September 1, 2010, October 11, 2012, and July 14, 2016. The most recent amendment caused the Fulton County Superior Court Business Case Division to be renamed as the Metro Atlanta Business Case Division and revised Rule 1004 to allow voluntarily participating metro Atlanta counties to adopt the Rule within its own circuit. Gwinnett County was the first to adopt Rule 1004 as a pilot project in Gwinnett County State and Superior Court. As a result, two active Gwinnett County Superior Court Judges Randy Rich and Joseph Iannazzone joined the Business Court bench. Purpose Business Court provides just, accurate, timely, and efficient resolution of complex commercial and business cases, in addition to retaining legal business in Georgia and developing a robust body of business law in Georgia. Over 600 businesses have chosen Business Court to resolve their cases because of the expert judicial attention given to complicated business cases by experiences judges with specialized training in business law subjects. Litigants benefit from reduced resolution time through increased case management components, including: Comprehensive scheduling orders addressing all aspects of a case, including electronic discovery; Responsiveness to discovery disputes; Prompt scheduling of oral arguments and written rulings on all substantive motions; and Cases are not scheduled behind a general docket of criminal and civil cases. 2

Business Court Judges Judge John Goger Senior Judge Elizabeth Long Senior Judge Alice Bonner There are a total of six judges across two counties who serve the Business Court and receive case assignments on a rotating basis. In Fulton County, there are three Senior Judges Judge Long, Judge Bonner, and Judge Westmoreland and one Active Judge Judge Goger. Two Active Judges Judge Iannazzone and Judge Rich serve as the Business Court judges for cases arising in Gwinnett. The Chief Judge appoints the Business Court Bench for up to a two year term. With support staff, these Judges have the experience and time necessary to administer complex civil cases. Senior Judges are readily available to address any discovery dispute or other emergencies that may arise during the course of a case. While the Active Judges still maintain a general docket, they devote blocks of time to the exclusive administration of Business Court cases. Senior Judge Melvin Westmoreland Judge Randy Rich Judge Joseph Iannazzone eligibility of cases seeking transfer to Business Court by assessing the procedural and substantive complexity presented in the cases. Currently, the Business Court Committee is comprised of Judge Goger (Chief Business Case Division Judge), Chief Judge Tusan, Judge Edwards, Judge Markle, Judge Ellerbee, Judge Iannazzone and Judge Rich. Upon a majority vote of the Business Court Committee, cases can transfer to Business Court for assignment to a Business Court Judge. The Business Case Division Judges and the staff attorney host a series of monthly lectures coordinated with the assistance of the State Bar of Georgia. The lectures cover topics such as fiduciary duties, capitalization issues, corporate governance, derivative actions, and mergers and acquisitions, among other business law topics. A panel of seven Active Judges oversee the operations of the Business Court and vet the 3

2016 Business Court Highlights Business Court Expansion Projects In 2016, the Business Court supported an amendment to Rule 1004 which would allow additional metro Atlanta counties to adopt Rule 1004 within their respective circuit. The amendment unanimously passed in a vote by the State Bar of Georgia Board of Governors and was approved by the Supreme Court of Georgia on July 14, 2016. Gwinnett County was the first to adopt Rule 1004 and has begun accepting Business Court cases. The Business Court anticipates that other counties will join in adopting Rule 1004. Under the amended Rule, the Fulton County Business Case Division was renamed the Metro Atlanta Business Case Division. Business Court Impact Court-Wide Programs Area attorneys led seminars hosted by the Business Court for the benefit of the Superior Court judges and staff attorneys, covering a variety of topics such as new developments in electronic discovery, restrictive covenants, mediation techniques, officer and director liability, and recent developments in business law. Community Impact: Local Law Schools The Business Court has also been active with local law schools, hosting externs from Emory University, Georgia State University, and University Of Georgia. Case Selection Cases that implicate the Georgia Securities Act of 1973, UCC, Georgia Business Corporation Code, Uniform Partnership Act, Uniform Limited Partnership Act, Georgia Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act, or Georgia Limited Liability Company Act are eligible to transfer to the Business Court. Additionally, any other action in which the amount in controversy exceeds $1 million and warrants the attention of the Business Court, including large contract and business tort cases and other complex commercial litigation may also be considered. Cases involving personal injury, wrongful death, employment discrimination, or consumer claims in which each individual s claims are in the aggregate less than $1 million are typically not eligible for transfer to Business Court. However, exclusions may be waived with consent of all parties. Of the cases currently pending in the business court, approximately 70% involve contract disputes or allege tortious business practices such as mismanagement or misappropriation. The remaining cases included disputes regarding management of trusts (10%), disputes as to alleged business ownership (10%), and shareholder derivative actions or case alleging violations of securities laws (10%). 4

Method of Transfer to Business Court Cases are identified for transfer to Business Court upon motion of one or more parties or by judicial request. The total number of transfers to Business Court since the inception of the program is 239. In 2016, like the previous year, the primary method of identification for cases transferred to Business Court was by party request. At the program s inception and as recently as 2013, the majority of transfer requests were made by judges. In addition, more related cases transferred to the Business Court in 2016 than any previous year. In 2016, 20 cases were considered for transfer on a party s request (including related cases). By contrast, only 1 case was considered for transfer by judicial request. Over the life of the program, party requests outnumber judicial requests. In 2016, only one case was denied transfer to Business Court. As attorneys have become more familiar with the transfer criteria, the number of denied motions to transfer has declined. 6 1 How Cases Were Identified for Transfer to Business Court in 2016 6 5 Transfer Requests (2006-2016): Requests by Party 194 (62%) Requests by Judge 115 (38%) TOTAL REQUESTS 309 Requests Declined 67 Requests Withdrawn 3 Requests Accepted 239 3 Defense Motion Plaintiff Motion Joint Motion Judicial Request Related Case The Business Court added 20 new cases in 2016. Since its inception, the Business Court has considered 309 requests for transfer and has accepted a total of 239 cases. 40 Cases Transferred to Business Court (2012-2016) 30 20 10 0 5

Case Management and Speed of Disposition The Business Court utilizes early case management conferences (within 30 days of transfer) and ready availability to address discovery issues as they arise. All hearings and conferences are specially set. Together, these features comprise a program that is dedicated to the efficient, just, and timely resolution of complex commercial and business cases with an emphasis on providing superior service to litigants throughout the process. The Business Court strives to issue an order on all pending motions within 30 days of the hearing or completion of briefing. The average time for disposition of motions in 2015 and 2016 was approximately 16 days. In 2016, the Business Court handled 47 total cases. Of these, 17 were closed or settled. The Business Court held 43 specially set conferences or hearings and issued 268 orders. Only 24 conferences were in person. As of March 2017, the average age of all active cases pending in Business Court was 416 days. Of the 6 cases pending for more than three years, 5 are stayed pending appeals. The average age of all cases closed in 2016 was 488 days. Of the 17 cases closed in 2016, 53% of the matters were disposed of within 12 months of transfer to Business Court. One case closed in 2016 had been pending 2,808 days. Excluding this outlier, the average case closed in 2016 had been pending 344 days. Age of Cases Closed in 2016 Age of Active Cases 47% 12% 41% 20% 32% 18% 12% 18% 0-6 Months 6-12 Months 12+ Months Pending 0-6 Months Pending 12-24 Months Pending Over 36 Months Pending 6-12 Months Pending 24-36 Months The majority of cases transferred to the Metro Atlanta Business Court are ultimately resolved by the parties through settlement. Very few cases go to trial. Disposition of cases (2006-2016): Dismissed with prejudice by parties 103 Dismissed without prejudice 40 Motion to Dismiss granted 10 Motion for Summary Judgment granted 22 Other (removal, arbitration, etc.) 23 Trial 5 6

Collection of Transfer Fees Annual Transfer Fees $17,000 $14,000 $12,000 $10,000 $10,000 Transfer fees are assessed against the moving party or parties once a case is accepted for transfer to Business Court. Cases accepted following a judicial request to transfer are not assigned a transfer fee. The transfer fee funds are used for Business Court operations and Senior Judge funding. Out of the 20 cases transferred to Business Court in 2016, $14,000 in transfer fees were collected. Fees are not collected for related cases or judicial requests. Senior Judge Expense Senior Judge Pay (2012-2016) $27,441 $22,644 $19,957 $19,860 $17,526 Senior Judge pay for the year 2016 was the second lowest since 2009. Senior Judge usage is funded through general state or county senior judge allocations and the collection of transfer fees. $40,000 Transfer Fees Collected vs. Senior Judge Pay Expense $30,000 $20,000 Senior Judge Pay Transfer Fees $10,000 $0 For more information about the Business Court, please contact Jody Rhodes at (404) 613-3690 or jody.rhodes@fultoncountyga.gov 7