More Categories

Rule 2-504.1 – Scheduling Conference

May 13, 2021 | Civil Prodcedure, Maryland

(a) When Required. In any of the following circumstances, the court shall issue an order requiring the parties to attend a scheduling conference:

(1) in an action placed or likely to be placed in a scheduling category for which the case management plan adopted pursuant to Rule 16-302(b) requires a scheduling conference;
(2) in an action in which an objection to computer-generated evidence is filed under Rule 2-504.3(d); or
(3) in an action, in which a party requests a scheduling conference and represents that, despite a good faith effort, the parties have been unable to reach an agreement (i) on a plan for the scheduling and completion of discovery, (ii) on the proposal of any party to pursue an available and appropriate form of alternative dispute resolution, or (iii) on any other matter eligible for inclusion in a scheduling order under Rule 2-504.
(b) When Permitted. The court may issue an order in any action requiring the parties to attend a scheduling conference.
(c) Order for Scheduling Conference. An order setting a scheduling conference may require that the parties, at least ten days before the conference:

(1) complete sufficient initial discovery to enable them to participate in the conference meaningfully and in good faith and to make decisions regarding (A) settlement, (B) consideration of available and appropriate forms of alternative dispute resolution, (C) limitation of issues, (D) stipulations, (E) any issues relating to preserving discoverable information, (F) any issues relating to discovery of electronically stored information, including the form in which it is to be produced, (G) any issues relating to claims of privilege or of protection, and (H) other matters that may be considered at the conference; and
(2) confer in person or by telephone and attempt to reach agreement or narrow the areas of disagreement regarding the matters that may be considered at the conference and determine whether the action or any issues in the action are suitable for referral to an alternative dispute resolution in accordance with Title 17, Chapters 100 and 200 of these rules.

Committee note: Examples of matters that may be considered at a scheduling conference when discovery of electronically stored information is expected, include:

(1) its identification and retention;
(2) the form of production, such as PDF, TIFF, or JPEG files, or native form, for example, Microsoft Word, Excel, etc.;
(3) the manner of production, such as CD-ROM;
(4) any production of indices;
(5) any electronic numbering of documents and information;
(6) apportionment of costs for production of electronically stored information not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost;
(7) a process by which the parties may assert claims of privilege or of protection after production; and
(8) whether the parties agree to refer discovery disputes to a magistrate or Special Magistrate.

The parties may also need to address any request for metadata, for example, information embedded in an electronic data file that describes how, when, and by whom it was created, received, accessed, or modified or how it is formatted. For a discussion of metadata and factors to consider in determining the extent to which metadata should be preserved and produced in a particular case, see, The Sedona Conference, The Sedona Principles: Best Practices Recommendations and Principles for Addressing Electronic Document Production, (2d ed. 2007), Principle 12 and related Comment.

(d) Time and Method of Holding Conference. Except (1) upon agreement of the parties, (2) upon a finding of good cause by the court, or (3) in an action assigned to a family division under Rule 16-307(a)(2), a scheduling conference shall not be held earlier than 30 days after the date of the order. If the court requires the completion of any discovery pursuant to section (c) of this Rule, it shall afford the parties a reasonable opportunity to complete the discovery. The court may hold a scheduling conference in chambers, in open court, or by telephone or other electronic means.
(e) Scheduling Order. Case management decisions made by the court at or as a result of a scheduling conference shall be included in a scheduling order entered pursuant to Rule 2-504. A court may not order a party or counsel for a party to participate in alternative dispute resolution under Rule 2-504 except in accordance with Rule 9-205 or Rule 17-201.

Md. R. Civ. P. Cir. Ct. 2-504.1

This Rule is new.

Adopted June 7, 1994, eff. Oct. 1, 1994. Amended June 10, 1997, eff. July 1, 1997; Feb. 10, 1998, eff. July 1, 1998; Oct. 5, 1998, eff. Jan. 1, 1999; March 5, 2001, eff. July 1, 2001; Dec. 4, 2007, eff. Jan. 1, 2008; Nov. 1, 2012, eff. Jan. 1, 2013; Sept. 17, 2015, eff. Jan. 1, 2016; June 6, 2016, eff. July 1, 2016.

HISTORICAL NOTES

2001 Orders

The March 5, 2001, order, in section (a), in the introductory paragraph, inserted “In any of the following circumstances,; in subsecs. (a)(1) and (a)(2), substituted “in an action for “in any action; in subsec. (a)(3), substituted “in an action, in which a party requests a scheduling conference and represents that for “in any action, upon request of a party stating that; in subsec. (c)(1), substituted “in the conference meaningfully and in good faith for “meaningfully and in good faith in the conference and inserted the designations for items (A) to (E); and in section (d), substituted “(1) upon agreement of the parties, (2) upon a finding of good cause by the court, or (3) in an action assigned to a family division under Rule 16-204(a)(2) for “upon agreement of the parties or upon a finding of good cause by the court.

2007 Orders

The December 4, 2007, order, rewrote (c)(1); and added a Committee note after section (c). Section (c)(1) previously read:

‘(1) complete sufficient initial discovery to enable them to participate in the conference meaningfully and in good faith and to make decisions regarding (A) settlement, (B) consideration of available and appropriate forms of alternative dispute resolution, (C) limitation of issues, (D) stipulations, and (E) other matters that may be considered at the conference; and’

2012 Orders

The November 1, 2012, order amended (c) and (e) to conform terminology and internal references to the revision of the Rules in Title 17.

2015 Orders

The September 17, 2015, order, changed the term “master to “magistrate.

2016 Orders

The June 6, 2016, order revised internal references in the Rule.