The recent resolve of the Advisory Committee on the Civil Rules to revisit reform of the discovery rules, which the Supreme Court revised as recently as 1993, is replete with ironies. In August, 1998, that Committee, which has primary responsibility for studying the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and developing suggestions for their improvement, published proposals that would significantly revise the substantial 1993 revisions of the discovery rules. Ironies suffuse many specific aspects of the rule revision process and of the proposals to revise the 1993 revisions less than five years after their implementation. I emphasize the proposal to revise mandatory automatic disclosure, which requires that litigants exchange important information before formal discovery. This procedure has been controversial, although several other proposed revisions would significantly change discovery and are similarly ironic.
Carl Tobias, Discovery Reform Redux, 31 Conn. L. Rev. 1433 (1998)