Notice Regarding Judge Gorton’s Standing Order On Interim CJA 20 Vouchers In Excess Compensation Cases; Scheduling Order

=== Notice Regarding Judge Gorton’s Standing Order On Interim CJA 20 Vouchers In Excess Compensation Cases ===

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS NOTICE REGARDING JUDGE GORTON’S STANDING ORDER ON INTERIM CJA 20 VOUCHERS IN EXCESS COMPENSATION CASES Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton has issued a Standing Order regarding the filing of interim CJA 20 vouchers which is designed to facilitate the prompt review and payment of CJA 20 vouchers in cases involving claims for compensation that exceed (by approximately two times) the applicable statutory maximum for felonies and non-capital post-conviction proceedings (currently $9,700), and other representations. Interim excess compensation payments are typically allowed only after an attorney’s motion for same is granted. Judge Gorton will not require CJA counsel to file a motion for interim excess compensation, but, absent leave of court, will require CJA counsel to file an interim CJA 20 voucher once the total unpaid fees and expenses that appear on the CJA 20 voucher reach $19,000, and will require the interim CJA 20 voucher to be submitted with a memorandum explaining why the case is “extended” and/or “complex” and the charges sought are reasonable. CJA counsel will also be required to file subsequent interim vouchers once the total unpaid fees and expenses incurred reach $9,000. Memoranda accompanying second and subsequent vouchers should identify the amounts paid on prior interim vouchers. Timely filing of interim vouchers once the aforementioned fee totals have been accumulated will enable the court to review the vouchers in closer proximity to the time the services were rendered and reduce the financial hardship to CJA counsel that can result when payment is delayed until the conclusion of a case. This order will apply to cases filed before Judge Gorton on or after the effective date of the attached Standing Order and to all cases then pending before Judge Gorton unless leave of court is granted to proceed otherwise. May 7, 2010 Sarah Allison Thornton Clerk of Court UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS STANDING ORDER RE: THE FILING OF INTERIM CJA 20 VOUCHERS IN EXCESS COMPENSATION CASES BEFORE JUDGE GORTON Whereas, THE District of Massachusetts has adopted a Plan for Implementing the Criminal Justice Act of 1964, 18 U.S.C. §3006A that provides for the appointment and compensation of private counsel in a substantial proportion of cases; and WHEREAS, the timely submission of interim CJA 20 vouchers will facilitate the prudent administration of CJA funds and relieve court-appointed attorneys of financial hardships; The following procedures shall govern the submission of CJA 20 vouchers seeking compensation in excess of the applicable statutory maximum in cases before Judge Gorton, unless leave of court is granted to proceed othenvise: (1) Counsel shall submit a first interim voucher once the total unpaid fees and expenses (i.e., the amount to be inserted on CJA 20, line 27) reach or exceed $19.000. Said voucher must be supported by a memorandum that explains why the case is "extended" and/or "complex" and the excess compensation claimed is necessary to provide fair compensation. See Guidelines for Administering the CJA and Related Statutes, Vol. 7, Guide to Judician' Policy, Part A, Ch. 2, §§230.23.40, 230.30(b), 230.73.10. (2) Thereafter, counsel shall submit subsequent interim vouchers any time the accumulated (and not previously paid) fees and expenses equal or exceed $9.000. All subsequent interim vouchers must be accompanied by a memorandum that brieflY reiterates why the case is "extended" and/or "complex", explains the charges sought and summarizes the amounts paid on all previous interim vouchers. SO ORDERED. /1~;;;1!:!:1~ United States District Judge Date Date

=== Scheduling Order ===

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS v. Civil Action No. -NMG NOTICE OF SCHEDULING CONFERENCE An initial scheduling conference will be held in Courtroom No. 4 on the 3rd floor at .m. on , in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) and Local Rule 16.1. The court considers attendance of the senior lawyers ultimately responsible for the case and compliance with sections (B), (C), and (D) of Local Rule 16.11 to be of the utmost importance. Counsel may be given a continuance only if actually engaged on trial. Failure to comply fully with this notice and with sections (B), (C), and (D) of Local Rule 16.1 may result in sanctions under Local Rule 1.3. Counsel for the plaintiff is responsible for ensuring that all parties and/or their attorneys, who have not filed an answer or appearance with the court, are notified of the scheduling conference date. 1 These sections of Local Rule 16.1 provide: (B) Obligation of counsel to confer. Unless otherwise ordered by the judge, counsel for the parties shall, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f), confer no later than twenty one (21) days before the date for the scheduling conference for the purpose of: (1) preparing an agenda of matters to be discussed at the scheduling conference, (2) preparing a proposed pretrial schedule for the case that includes a plan for discovery, and (3) considering whether they will consent to trial by magistrate judge. (C) Settlement proposals. Unless otherwise ordered by the judge, the plaintiff shall present written settlement proposals to all defendants no later than ten (10) days before the date for the scheduling conference. Defense counsel shall have conferred with their clients on the subject of settlement before the scheduling conference and be prepared to respond to the proposals at the scheduling conference. (D) Joint statement. Unless otherwise ordered by the judge, the parties are required to file, no later than five (5) business days before the scheduling conference and after consideration of the topics contemplated by Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(b) and 26(f), a joint statement containing a proposed pretrial schedule, which shall include: (1) a joint discovery plan scheduling the time and length for all discovery events, that shall (a) conform to the obligation to limit discovery set forth in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b), and (b) take into account the desirability of conducting phased discovery in which the first phase is limited to developing information needed for a realistic assessment of the case and, if the case does not terminate, the second phase is directed at information needed to prepare for trial; and (2) a proposed schedule for the filing of motions; and (3) certifications signed by counsel and by an authorized representative of each party affirming that each party and that party's counsel have conferred: (a) with a view to establishing a budget for the costs of conducting the full course--and various alternative courses--of the litigation; and (b) to consider the resolution of the litigation through the use of alternative dispute resolution programs such as those outlined in Local Rule 16.4. Electronic signatures of such authorize representatives are acceptable but the filing thereof will be deemed to certify that counsel have actual signatures in their possession. To the extent that all parties are able to reach agreement on a proposed pretrial schedule, they shall so indicate. To the extent that the parties differ on what the pretrial schedule should be, they shall set forth separately the items on which they differ and indicate the nature of that difference. The purpose of the parties' proposed pretrial schedule or schedules shall be to advise the judge of the parties' best estimates of the amounts of time they will need to accomplish specified pretrial steps. The parties' proposed agenda for the scheduling conference, and their proposed pretrial schedule or schedules, shall be considered by the judge as advisory only. (Sched Conf Notice.wpd - 12/00) Date United States District Judge Gorton By: /s/ Christine Lima Deputy Clerk