The United States House of Representatives recently passed the Attorney Accountability Act of 1995. Section 2 of the measure would modify existing Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 by prescribing two-way fee-shifting in diversity cases. Section 3 of the bill would amend Federal Rule of Evidence 702 in ways that limit expert testimony, ostensibly to increase “honesty in testimony.” Section 4 of the legislation would substantially revise the 1993 amendment of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, effectively returning to the 1983 version of the provision. This essay emphasizes section 4 of the Attorney Accountability Act, because I believe that its enactment is inadvisable for many of the same, and certain additional, reasons as passage of sections 2 and 3 are unwarranted.
Carl Tobias, Why Congress Should Reject Revision of Rule 11, 160 F.R.D. 275 (1995).