The Upshots of Using Early Neutral Evaluation in Pre-discovery of Documents in Complex Civil Litigation
Keywords:Early Neutral Evaluation, pre-discovery, discovery, complex civil litigation
AbstractThe preparation of complex cases are challenging to parties to the action and their counsels. Observably, the complexity of a case and the inability to comprehend and manage it effectively make the successful conduct of discovery of documents difficult. The purpose of this study is, firstly; to identify the impediments to formal discovery of documents in complex civil litigation; and secondly; to discover the effects of using Early Neutral Evaluation in pre-discovery of documents in complex civil cases. This study relied on a doctrinal analysis method in analyzing related literature (including procedural laws and case reports from Malaysia and England) apart from procedural rules regulating the use of Early Neutral Evaluation in selected courts in the United States) on Early Neutral Evaluation, discovery and civil litigation in general. This study found that subject to certain modification of any local procedural rules in a jurisdiction, Early Neutral Evaluation is theoretically a viable mechanism to be integrated into the civil court system to counter obstacles in discovery of documents in complex civil litigation.
Brazil,W,D., (1990). A Close Look at Three Court-Sponsored ADR Programs: Why
They Exist, How They Operate, What They Deliver, and Whether They Threaten Important Values, The University of Chicago Legal Forum, 303-334.
Brazil, W.D., (2002). Court ADR 25 Years After Pound: Have We Found a Better
Way?”. Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution [Vol 18:1 2002] , 102.
Brazil, W.D., (2007). Early Neutral Evaluation or Mediation - When Might ENE
Delivery More Value , 14 Disp. Resol. Mag. 10, p.13, Retrieved from: http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/facpubs/165.
Brazil, W.D., (2012). The Merits of Early Neutral Evaluation. [Online]. Available:
http://jamsadrblog.com/2012/03/01/the-merits-of-early-neutral-evaluation/ (December 16, 2013).
Brazil, W.D. (2012). Early Neutral Evaluation, ( 1 st ed.). Chicago: American Bar
Association, (Chapter 6).
Burns, M. (2012). Property: New Kid on the block. 162 New Law Journal, 1491.
Bell, E., (2009). Judicial Case Management. Judicial Studies Institute Journal, 108.
Duryana Mohamad, The Process of Gathering Evidence in Civil Cases: Its
Application in Civil and Syariah Court [Online]. Available: http://irep.iium.edu.my/13514/1/The_Process_of_Gathering_Evidence_in_Civil_Cases_-_Duryana_Mohamed.pdf (April 7, 2014).
Duryana Mohamed. (2012). Discovery and Inspection of Documents under the
Malaysian and English Civil Procedure: A Study on Cases against the Internet Service
Providers, Aust. J.Basic & Appl.Sci., 6(11): 185-190.
Engro, K. & Lenihan, L.P. (2008). Understanding Early Neutral Evaluation in the
Western District of Pennsylvania. 10 Counsels J.3.
Gates, S.F. 2008. Ten Essential Elements of an Effective Resolution Programme”, 8
Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal, 397.
Garay, G of Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein P.C. (2014). Available:
http://www.what-is-early-neutral-evaluation-ENE-alternative-dispute-resolution-ADR.php.htm(February 2. 2014).
Germain, K.B. Why Might ENE Be Effective In Trademark Cases? - The Use of
Subject-Savvy Early Neutral Evaluators to Suggest Solutions to Significant Trademark/Trade Dress Disputes in Exparte and Interpartes Situation”, February 2008 , ALI-ABA COURSE OF STUDY MATERIALS p 2
Gurmit Kaur. (2001). Civil Procedure- MLJ CLP Series, Kuala Lumpur: Malayan
Law Journal, 187.
Hamid Sultan Bin Abu Baker. 2012. Janab’s Key to Civil Procedure - COMBINED
RULES (The Rules of Court 2012 Annexed). (5th ed.) Kuala Lumpur: Janab (M) Sdn. Bhd.
Kuhner, T.K.,(2005). Court-Connected Mediation Compared: The Cases of Argentina
and the United States. ILSA Journal of International and Comparative Law 11(3):1-36.
Lande, J. 2008. The movement Toward Early Case Handling in Courts and Private
Dispute Resolution”, Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 24 Ohio St. J. on Disp. Resol.81 , 7.
Mulcahny, L., 2013. The collective interest in private dispute resolution. Oxford
Journal of Legal Studies.33(1):59,
Maycock, E.M. (2001). Early Neutral Evaluation. Utah Bar Journal, 14 Utah Bar. J
Skinner, A.O., (2011). Alternative Dispute Resolution Expands into Pre-trial Practice:
An introduction, to the role of e-neutrals. Cardoza Journal of Conflict Resolution, 113, 113-139.
Wissler, R., 2004. The Effectiveness of Court-Connected Dispute Resolution in Civil
Cases. 22 Conflict Resolution Quarterly 55.
Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (Malaysia)
Rules of Court 2012 (England)
The United States District Court Northern District Court of California ADR Local Rules. Available: http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/ene (February, 14.2014).
American Arbitration Association, Early Neutral Evaluation: Getting An Expert's Assessment
[Online].Available:,https://www.adr.org/aaa/faces/services/disputeavoidanceservices/earlyneutralevaluation?_afrLoop=27651244483962&_afrWindowMode=0&_afrWindowId=7jddqorsx_251#%40%3F_afrWindowId%3D7jddqorsx_251%26_afrLoop%3D27651244483962%26_afrWindowMode%3D0%26_adf.ctrl-state%3D7jddqorsx_295 (April 12,2014).
United States District Court District of Vermont. Early Neutral Evaluation Program.
Annual Report (January 1, 2012-December 31, 2012), p 5. http://www.vtd.uscourts.gov/sites/vtd/files/2012%20ENE%20Annual%20Report.pdf (25.4.2014).
The United States District Court Northern District Court of California ENE
programme (2014) (Retrieved from: http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/ene (April 14, 2014).
Reorganised California Rules of Court 2007 (Chapter 5, Rule 3.400) Retrieved from
the website: http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/cmplx_lit/bin/reference/Other%20States/California/california%20rules%20excerpt.pdf (May 7, 2014).
The National Centre for State Courts in the United States (2014, February 3).
Retrieved from the National Centre for State Courts in the United States website: http://www.ncsc.org/Topics/Civil/Complex-Litigation/Resource-Guide.aspx
Bruce v Odham Press Ltd (1936) 1 K.B. p 712
Chua Su Yin & Co v Ng Sung Yee  2 MLJ 348
Crossley v Crossley  E.W.C.A. Civ. 14
Compagnie Financier du Pacifique v Peruvian Guano Co, (1882) 11 QBD 55
Dato’ Au Ba Chi and Ors v Koh Keng Kheng and Ors 3 MLJ 445 at 447 Greenough v Gaskell  1 My & K 98).
Carrie Fancher (Jayne), Plaintiff v. Bank of America, N.A., Defendant. (2012 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 150834),
Faber Merlin Malaysia Bhd v Ban Guan Sdn Bhd 1 MLJ 105.
Landis v N. Am. Co., 299 (US.248, 254-255, 57 S.Ct.163, 81 L.Ed.153(1936).
Parch v. United Bristol Hospitals Board  1 WLR 955,
Rassam v Budge (1893) 1 QBD 57
Shaw v Shaw (1954) 2 Q.B.429,441
String Cheese Incident, 2006 (U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97388, 2006 WL 894955, at p.2)
Siegert v.Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 231-32, 111 S. Ct. 1789, 114 L. Ed. 2d 277 (1991).
Waugh v British Railways Board  1 WLR 955).
Williams v Wilcox (1838) 8 A & E p. 331.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).