- Federal Court’s Inherent Authority Revisited
- May 31, 2017 | Authors: Melissa L. Fox; Robert D. Owen; Lewis S. Wiener; P. Bruce Wright
- Law Firms: Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP - Atlanta Office; Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP - New York Office; Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP - Washington Office; Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP - New York Office
Captive Insurance Company Reports
In recent years, discussions regarding the contours of a federal court’s inherent authority to sanction litigants for bad-faith behavior have been heating up faster than a defective tire at highway speeds. In the 2015 amendments to the federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Civil Rules Advisory Committee considered the impact of inherent authority on the patchwork of spoliation cases decided in the last decade to displace it wherever the new Rule37(e) applied.
In their article for Captive Insurance Company Reports, Eversheds Sutherland (US) attorneys Robert Owen, Lewis Wiener, P. Bruce Wright and Melissa Fox breakdown the recent US Supreme Court’s decision in Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger and provide key takeaways.