Host Paul W. Grimm continues his conversation with Professor Maura R. Grossman on the legal system’s growing challenges with generative AI and deepfakes. They explore how AI-generated images, video, and audio differ from traditional fakes—and why they present unique evidentiary challenges and ethical problems for lawyers and judges. They also discuss the legal implications of the “liar’s dividend,” the psychological impact of AI-generated evidence on juries, and potential updates to the Federal Rules of Evidence. In the absence of new rules dealing with AI evidence, they explain how early case management, protective orders, and Rules 403 and 901 can address a few of these challenges.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

• Grossman, Grimm & Coglianese "AI in the Courts: How Worried Should We Be?" (Judicature)
  This Judicature article offers a discussion of the pros and cons of AI in the legal profession following the rise of ChatGPT and other large language models (LLMs).

Federal Rules of Evidence – In particular, this episode focuses on:

• Rule 104(a) & (b): Preliminary vs. conditional relevance
• Rule 403: Exclusion of prejudicial evidence
• Rule 901: Authentication of evidence
• Rule 702: Expert testimony

ABOUT THE HOST

Judge Paul W. Grimm (ret.) is the David F. Levi Professor of the Practice of Law and Director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law School. From December 2012 until his retirement in December 2022, he served as a district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, with chambers in Greenbelt, Maryland. Click here to read his full bio.

On this episode, host Paul W. Grimm speaks with Professor Maura R. Grossman about the fundamentals of artificial intelligence and its growing influence on the legal system. They explore what AI is (and isn’t), how machine learning and natural language processing work, and the differences between traditional automation and modern generative AI. In layman’s terms, they discuss other key concepts, such as supervised and unsupervised learning, reinforcement training, and deepfakes, and other advances that have accelerated AI’s development. Finally, they address a few potential risks of generative AI, including hallucinations, bias, and misuse in court, which sets the stage for a deeper conversation about legal implications on the next episode, "To Trust or Not to Trust: AI in Legal Practice."

ABOUT THE HOST

Judge Paul W. Grimm (ret.) is the David F. Levi Professor of the Practice of Law and Director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law School. From December 2012 until his retirement in December 2022, he served as a district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, with chambers in Greenbelt, Maryland. Click here to read his full bio.

On this episode, host Paul W. Grimm speaks with Senior U.S. District Court Judge David G. Campbell about changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure concerning discovery practices, and in particular, the effects of the “2015 Amendments” to the rules. These amendments include narrowing the scope of discovery to relevant and proportional information, reintroducing proportionality as a primary limitation to the scope of discovery, and emphasizing judicial case management to streamline litigation. Their discussion highlights how better discovery practices can lead attorneys to faster, better, and cheaper results for their clients.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:

• Information about the U.S. Courts Rulemaking Process
• 2015 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
• Judicature article on the 2015 Discovery Amendments (PDF)

ABOUT THE HOST

Judge Paul W. Grimm (ret.) is the David F. Levi Professor of the Practice of Law and Director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law School. From December 2012 until his retirement in December 2022, he served as a district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, with chambers in Greenbelt, Maryland. Click here to read his full bio.

On this episode, host Paul W. Grimm speaks with Judges Carolyn B. Kuhl and William F. Highberger of the Superior Court of California about the challenges of managing increasingly complex civil caseloads in state and federal courts. The judges introduce their concept of a “Unified Theory of Case Management,” which aims to streamline court procedures through a set of core, case-neutral goals, strategies, and toolkits. Their discussion emphasizes the importance of efficient, fair, and cost-effective resolution of cases, aiming to ensure the judicial process is perceived as fair by all parties involved.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:

• Toward Fairer, Quicker, Cheaper Litigation: A Unified Theory of Civil Case Management (Judicature)
• Civil Justice Initiative Implementation Tools (National Center for State Courts)
• Why Don’t Judges Case Manage? (University of Miami Law Review)

ABOUT THE HOST

Judge Paul W. Grimm (ret.) is the David F. Levi Professor of the Practice of Law and Director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law School. From December 2012 until his retirement in December 2022, he served as a district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, with chambers in Greenbelt, Maryland. Click here to read his full bio.

On this episode, host Paul W. Grimm talks with retired U.S. Magistrate Judge John Facciola about his ongoing work as a special master in complex litigation cases. They discuss the origins of the term “special master,” why certain complex cases (especially mass tort MDLs) warrant special masters, their role in these cases, and how they can serve as effective resources to counsel and the district court judge. Their conversation emphasizes that, when used effectively and creatively, special masters can reduce the cost of federal litigation to expand access to justice.

BACKGROUND

Rule 53 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes judges to appoint a “master” to assist the court when exceptional conditions prevent the assigned judge from handling all matters associated with a case. Commonly referred to as “special masters,” these judicial adjuncts address pretrial and posttrial matters that “cannot be effectively and timely addressed by an available district judge or magistrate judge.” Frequently, they oversee the discovery process and resolve disputes when they arise, supervise settlement discussions, perform accountings, or compute damages. The order appointing the master must direct them to proceed with all reasonable diligence, and clearly state the scope of their duties, including any limits to it.

ABOUT THE HOST

Judge Paul W. Grimm (ret.) is the David F. Levi Professor of the Practice of Law and Director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law School. From December 2012 until his retirement in December 2022, he served as a district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, with chambers in Greenbelt, Maryland. Click here to read his full bio.

On this episode, host Paul W. Grimm talks with his former colleague at the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, George Hazel, who entered private practice at Gibson Dunn in 2023 after nearly ten years serving as a judge of that court. Their wide-ranging discussion offers practical tips and advice for attorneys handling both civil and criminal cases.

Additional links: 

• Click here to read George Hazel’s full profile and bio on Gibson Dunn’s website
• Listen and subscribe to George Hazel’s podcast “A View from the Bench” on Apple Podcasts.

ABOUT THE HOST

Judge Paul W. Grimm (ret.) is the David F. Levi Professor of the Practice of Law and Director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law School. From December 2012 until his retirement in December 2022, he served as a district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, with chambers in Greenbelt, Maryland. Click here to read his full bio.

On this episode, host Paul W. Grimm, a retired federal judge and director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law, and Professor Dan Capra, the Reed Professor of Law at Fordham University and a reporter for the Advisory Committee of the Federal Rules of Evidence, continue their conversation about amendments to the Federal Rules of Evidence.

This episode focuses on amendments to Rules 613, 801, 804, 1006, and a new Rule, 107, which are slated to take effect on December 1, 2024. Their discussion offers context for why new rules and amendments are necessary to ensure uniform application across the federal courts.

For more information about these and other pending rules and amendments, visit this page on the U.S. Courts website.

ABOUT THE HOST

Judge Paul W. Grimm (ret.) is the David F. Levi Professor of the Practice of Law and Director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law School. From December 2012 until his retirement in December 2022, he served as a district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, with chambers in Greenbelt, Maryland. Click here to read his full bio.

On this episode, host Paul W. Grimm, a retired federal judge and director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law, and Professor Dan Capra, the Reed Professor of Law at Fordham University and a reporter for the Advisory Committee of the Federal  Rules of Evidence, discuss the 2023 amendments to the Federal Rules of Evidence 106, 615, and 702. Their conversation highlights how even subtle revisions to the rules can significantly improve the fairness of court proceedings.

ADDITIONAL NOTES

• This episode was recorded before the Dec. 1, 2023, deadline for Congress to act before the amendments would go into effect. Congress did not act to modify or prevent the rules from going into effect, so they have all since entered the Federal Rules of Evidence.
• Some listeners may find it helpful to review the original rules along with changes. This blog by Melinda Burton, attorney at the firm Faruki PLLC, highlights the revisions that went into effect.
• In 2020, Professor Capra published the article "Evidentiary Irony and the Incomplete Rule of Completeness: A Proposal to Amend Federal Rule of Evidence 106"  co-authored with Professor Liesa L. Richter in the Minnesota Law Review. In 2021, Professor Capra and Professor Richter published the article "The" Rule: Modernizing the Potent, But Overlooked, Rule of Witness Sequestration in the William & Mary Law Review.

ABOUT THE HOST

Judge Paul W. Grimm (ret.) is the David F. Levi Professor of the Practice of Law and Director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law School. From December 2012 until his retirement in December 2022, he served as a district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, with chambers in Greenbelt, Maryland. Click here to read his full bio.

On the inaugural episode of "Order in the Court," host Paul W. Grimm, a retired federal judge and director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law, and U.S. District Judge Robin L. Rosenberg discuss the federal rules of civil procedure and the rulemaking process. They break down how the rules are made and how they work in order to help attorneys, judges, and the general public better understand this essential aspect of the United States court system.

ADDITIONAL LINKS

• More information about the federal rulemaking process can be found on the uscourts.gov website.
• The next meeting of the Civil Rules Committee is scheduled to occur in Denver, Colorado in April 2024. The current calendar of rules committee meetings can be found here. Transcripts and recordings of past meetings are archived here.
• Click here to read Judge Robin L. Rosenberg's bio on the Federal Judicial Center's website.

ABOUT THE HOST

Judge Paul W. Grimm (ret.) is the David F. Levi Professor of the Practice of Law and Director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law School. From December 2012 until his retirement in December 2022, he served as a district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, with chambers in Greenbelt, Maryland. Click here to read his full bio.