North Carolina has adopted a new General Rule 26 (actually a revision of an existing Rule) according lawyers who are parents a 12-week period they may designate in which no deposition or hearings will occur in any case for which they are counsel of record. (See here and here for example. The Rule is here.) The previous Rule provided three weeks which an attorney could designate s free of depositions and hearings. The idea is to make lawyers' lives more pleasant, and the new versionb to enable new parents, whether by birth or adoption, to spend time with the new child early in its life in the family. It looks like a good idea for the families of lawyers and will very likely improve the lives of the lawyers and their families. It has made some national news.
As I read the Rule, the three week period is open to any lawyer for any reason, on 90-days written notice (and before any proceedings are scheduled that would conflict with the period). Hence, it is possible to go on vacation for more than a weekend. The amendment adds 12 weeks out of any 24 week period following birth or adoption to the secure-leave. The "secure-leave" periods are allocated on calendar years. There are some aspects that are puzzling to me, like where the notices go and whether there is service, but I expect that those are solved by the other procedural rules of the courts. (E.g., notice in criminal cases goes to the DA, not the relevant court, and the Rule does not say anything about service on other counsel/parties.) I infer from mention of depositions and proceedings, that what is involved is a stay of events that require the lawyer to appear somewhere. Written and document discovery goes ahead without pause, and disclosures. Does motion work get stayed or does it proceed? I suppose that practitioners in NC have that sorted out. Of course the Notice has to say that the attorney has taken measure to protect the interests of their clients during the secure leave, and that it not being designated "for the purpose of interfering with the timely disposition of any proceeding." Side benefit is okay, just not main or sole purpose?
As stated above, it looks like a good idea. I wonder if there are any studies on how it works in practice. The three week period are relatively short, and do not seem very amenable to significant delays or obstruction. But 12 weeks is a significantly longer time, particularly as the Rule does not seem to require seriatum sequential week designations, i.e., the 12 weeks can be broken up and not taken as block. Taken as a block, it is a three-month delay in the case -- or at least a three month stay of proceedings and depositions, which could turn into a significantly longer delay depending on when and how taken. But every Rule has its possible use for delay or obstruction, and can be abused. I am not saying it is especially subject to abuse, or that it is subject to much abuse. Another aspect that I am wondering about is the effect in larger cases. Plaintiff has a team of five lawyers and Defendant 1 has a team of four lawyers and Defendant 2 has a team of 7 lawyers. No particular lawyer on any team is actually necessary for any proceeding or deposition, although the clients are likely to have preferences about who does what. If lawyer A for Plaintiff gives notice of secure weeks, does that stay all proceedings and depositions even though Lawyer A is not necessary for any of the proceedings or depositions? The Rule seems to say so, but that would be unnecessary delay. I suppose one would address it to the trial court by motion, but there is nothing in the rule about such motions. The closest is the provision telling courts to make reasonable accommodation for untimely notices connected to birth or adoption. That is quite different however. What happens if secure leave periods are stacked? Lawyer A takes weeks 1 through 12, then Lawyer B takes the next block, and so on. Left to the good graces of the Court?
An interesting experiment. Worth watching.
Recent Comments