United States District Courts – Southern District of New York

The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, the federal trial court in Manhattan, is not a dedicated commercial court. However its location in one of the world’s leading commercial and financial centers and its constitutional jurisdiction have brought prominent commercial cases to our Court since it first began sitting on the first Tuesday of November in 1789 – the first federal court to sit in the entire country.

The Court’s jurisdiction extends to cases arising under the laws of the United States (rather than state laws), and those laws contain numerous industry-specific regulatory schemes. For example, the securities laws regulate disclosures required not only for initial public offerings of stock but for periodic corporate reporting, tender offers, proxies, and merger and acquisition activity. Banks, brokers, investment managers, and other financial services entities are subject to a wide range of federal regulations. The Federal Communications Act regulates interstate and international communications by radio, TV, wire, cable, and satellite. The food and drug laws regulate pharmaceuticals, food safety and labeling, tobacco, medical devices, cosmetics, vaccines, and veterinary products. Disputes relating to patent, trademark, copyright, and antitrust matters are all subject to federal law and come to our Court. All modes of transportation, including aviation, automobiles, maritime activity, and trucking are subject to vast federal regulation. Environmental laws regulate air and water quality, chemical pollution clean-up, water, mineral, and forest resources, wildlife and plants, and fish and game. Even gambling casinos are subject to federal regulation, and all of these areas are within the Court’s jurisdiction.

Our Court also hears domestic and cross-border insolvency cases such as Lehman Brothers, MF Global, China Fishery Group, Roust, and Ezra Holdings. Actions seeking enforcement of foreign arbitral awards under the New York Convention are also subject to federal law and thus come to our Court.

The national Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation transfers similar cases from around the country to a single court. Because of its broad commercial expertise, our Court is often the venue for such cases, including product liability claims, mass torts, and securities, banking, and antitrust class actions.

The Constitution also gives the Court jurisdiction over cases arising out of the treaties of the United States, including the Hague Evidence Convention and the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. A federal law, 28 U.S.C. § 1792, provides another way for litigants to come to our Court to obtain evidence in the United States for use in foreign proceedings.

The Court’s jurisdiction also extends to cases between citizens of two states and a citizen of a state and a citizen of another county. Thus, the Court handles international contract actions and proceedings to enforce foreign judgments.

The Court has 28 authorized active judges and currently has 19 senior judges (who operate with a reduced caseload). All but four of those judges sit in two adjacent courthouses in lower Manhattan. Upon filing, a case is randomly assigned to a single judge for all purposes, so that judge handles the case from its earliest pre-trial matters through judgment. Trial judges exercise the full panoply of equitable remedies including attachments, mandatory or prohibitory injunctions, stays, and accountings. In general, appeals are only from a final judgment in the trial court.

The Court’s docket has been electronic for years, so documents can be viewed and filed remotely. All courtrooms are equipped for the electronic presentation of evidence.

The Court receives many visits from the judiciaries of other countries and welcomes requests for dialogue and the opportunity to assist and learn.

The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, the federal trial court in Manhattan, is not a dedicated commercial court. However its location in one of the world’s leading commercial and financial centers and its constitutional jurisdiction have brought prominent commercial cases to our Court since it first began sitting on the first Tuesday of November in 1789 – the first federal court to sit in the entire country.

The Court’s jurisdiction extends to cases arising under the laws of the United States (rather than state laws), and those laws contain numerous industry-specific regulatory schemes. For example, the securities laws regulate disclosures required not only for initial public offerings of stock but for periodic corporate reporting, tender offers, proxies, and merger and acquisition activity. Banks, brokers, investment managers, and other financial services entities are subject to a wide range of federal regulations. The Federal Communications Act regulates interstate and international communications by radio, TV, wire, cable, and satellite. The food and drug laws regulate pharmaceuticals, food safety and labeling, tobacco, medical devices, cosmetics, vaccines, and veterinary products. Disputes relating to patent, trademark, copyright, and antitrust matters are all subject to federal law and come to our Court. All modes of transportation, including aviation, automobiles, maritime activity, and trucking are subject to vast federal regulation. Environmental laws regulate air and water quality, chemical pollution clean-up, water, mineral, and forest resources, wildlife and plants, and fish and game. Even gambling casinos are subject to federal regulation, and all of these areas are within the Court’s jurisdiction.

Our Court also hears domestic and cross-border insolvency cases such as Lehman Brothers, MF Global, China Fishery Group, Roust, and Ezra Holdings. Actions seeking enforcement of foreign arbitral awards under the New York Convention are also subject to federal law and thus come to our Court.

The national Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation transfers similar cases from around the country to a single court. Because of its broad commercial expertise, our Court is often the venue for such cases, including product liability claims, mass torts, and securities, banking, and antitrust class actions.

The Constitution also gives the Court jurisdiction over cases arising out of the treaties of the United States, including the Hague Evidence Convention and the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. A federal law, 28 U.S.C. § 1792, provides another way for litigants to come to our Court to obtain evidence in the United States for use in foreign proceedings.

The Court’s jurisdiction also extends to cases between citizens of two states and a citizen of a state and a citizen of another county. Thus, the Court handles international contract actions and proceedings to enforce foreign judgments.

The Court has 28 authorized active judges and currently has 16 senior judges (who operate with a reduced caseload). All but four of those judges sit in two adjacent courthouses in lower Manhattan. Upon filing, a case is randomly assigned to a single judge for all purposes, so that judge handles the case from its earliest pre-trial matters through judgment. Trial judges exercise the full panoply of equitable remedies including attachments, mandatory or prohibitory injunctions, stays, and accountings. In general, appeals are only from a final judgment in the trial court.

The Court’s docket has been electronic for years, so documents can be viewed and filed remotely. All courtrooms are equipped for the electronic presentation of evidence.

The Court receives many visits from the judiciaries of other countries and welcomes requests for dialogue and the opportunity to assist and lead

New York Supreme Court – Commercial Division

In 1995, a task force of the New York State Bar Association proposed establishing a Commercial Division of the general trial court in those areas of the state with significant commercial litigation. Later that year, the Commercial Division opened in New York County (Manhattan) and in Monroe County (Rochester). Over the course of the ensuing years, the Division has steadily expanded in response to requests of the commercial bar and the court system’s analysis of case data. Currently, 28 Commercial Division justices preside in ten jurisdictions across New York State.

The Commercial Division serves as a forum for adjudication of complicated commercial disputes. Successful resolution of these disputes requires particular expertise across the broad and complex expanse of commercial law. Because disclosure in commercial cases can be complicated, protracted and expensive, particularly in light of electronic discovery, the Division makes use of vigorous and efficient case management. The court sets deadlines and enforces them, managing discovery as needed to protect the rights of the parties to fair disclosure while minimizing expense and delay. Motion practice, especially in the form of motions to dismiss or for summary judgment, is common in commercial cases. The caseload of the Division is thus demanding, requiring court scholarship in commercial law, experience in the management of complex cases and a wealth of energy.

The Commercial Division has actively employed advanced technology to assist in handling its caseload. For instance, it pioneered implementation of sophisticated case management software now widely used in civil courts throughout New York. The Division has been a leading force in electronic filing of court documents in the state. Electronic filing began in the Commercial Division in New York County and has expanded to Erie, Kings, Nassau, New York, Suffolk and Westchester counties.

The Commercial Division has adopted Statewide Standards for Assignment of Cases and
Rules of Practice. These standards provide clarity as to which cases are heard in the Commercial Division and establish uniform practices and procedures for cases assigned there.

The Commercial Division has also utilized an alternative dispute resolution program, first
established in New York County. Justices may send matters to ADR at any time upon an order of referral. Detailed protocols and rosters of seasoned ADR neutrals have been established in many jurisdictions around the state.

The bar has responded very favorably to the work of the Commercial Division, as has the business community. The New York State Bar Association has referred to the Division as “a case study in successful judicial administration.” The Business Council of New York State applauded the work of the Division, describing the court as “the envy of businesses in other states.” The American Corporate Counsel Association has expressed its appreciation and support for the Division as “a role model of specialized court devoted to the resolution of business disputes.”

Supreme Court of Delaware

The Delaware Judicial Branch consists of the Supreme Court, the Court of Chancery, the Superior Court, the Family Court, the Court of Common Pleas, the Justice of the Peace Court, the Administrative Office of the Courts, and related judicial agencies.

In terms of interrelationships among the courts, the Delaware court system is similar to a pyramid. The Justice of the Peace Court represents the base of the pyramid and the Supreme Court the apex of the pyramid. As a litigant goes upward through the court system pyramid, the legal issues generally become more complex and thus, more costly to litigate. For this reason, cases decided as close as possible to the entry level of the court system generally result in cost savings in resources used to handle the matters and in speedier resolution of the issues at hand.

The Justice of the Peace Court, the initial entry level into the court system for most citizens, has jurisdiction over civil cases in which the disputed amount does not exceed $15,000. In criminal cases, the Justice of the Peace Court hears certain misdemeanors and most motor vehicle cases (excluding felonies) and the Justices of the Peace may act as committing magistrates for all crimes. Appeals from the Justice of the Peace Court may be taken to the Court of Common Pleas.

The Court of Common Pleas has jurisdiction in civil cases where the amount in controversy, exclusive of interest, does not exceed $50,000. In criminal cases, the Court of Common Pleas has jurisdiction over all misdemeanors except certain drug-related offenses. It also handles motor vehicle offenses (excluding felonies). In addition, the Court is responsible for preliminary hearings in felony cases. Appeals may be taken to the Superior Court.

The Family Court has exclusive jurisdiction over virtually all family and juvenile matters. All civil appeals, including those relating to juvenile delinquency, go directly to the Supreme Court while criminal cases are appealed to the Superior Court.

The Superior Court, Delaware’s court of general jurisdiction, has original jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases except equity cases. The Court has exclusive jurisdiction over felonies and almost all drug offenses. In civil matters, the Court’s authority to award damages is not subject to a monetary maximum. The Superior Court also serves as an intermediate appellate court by hearing appeals on the record from the Court of Common Pleas, the Family Court (in criminal cases), and various state agencies, boards and commissions. Appeals from the Superior Court may be taken on the record to the Supreme Court.

The Court of Chancery has jurisdiction to hear all matters relating to equity. The litigation in this tribunal deals largely with corporate issues, trusts, estates, other fiduciary matters, disputes involving the purchase of land, and questions of title to real estate, as well as commercial and contractual matters. The Court of Chancery has a national reputation in the business community and is responsible for developing case law in Delaware on corporate matters. Appeals from the Court of Chancery may be taken on the record to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court receives direct appeals from the Court of Chancery, the Superior Court, and the Family Court. As administrative head of the courts, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, in consultation with the other justices, sets administrative policy for the court system.

The Administrative Office of the Courts, including the Judicial Information Center and the Office of State Court Collections Enforcement, provides services to the Delaware Judiciary that are consistent with the statewide policies and goals for judicial administration and support operations established by the Supreme Court.

Other state agencies associated with the Delaware Judicial Branch include: Child Placement Review Board; Law Libraries; Office of the Public Guardian; Office of the Child Advocate; Child Death Review Commission; and the Delaware Nursing Home Residents Quality Assurance Commission.

Commerce Court – Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas

The Philadelphia Commerce Court is a specialized court of three judges devoted solely to the adjudication of certain commercial and/or business to business disputes.

The judges assigned to the court are all experienced jurists and only hear Commerce cases.  The types of litigation include shareholder disputes, sales of businesses, mergers and dissolutions of businesses, construction cases and disputes involving covenants not to compete.  Other disputes heard in the program involve legal, accounting and other non-medical malpractice, declaratory judgements involving insurance, other contractual disputes, confessed judgements, corporate fraud and libel actions.  The Commerce Court also oversees the real estate tax sequestration program which facilitates the collection of commercial real estate taxes as well as the taxi cab medallion loan program which was established to resolve cases involving numerous defaulted loans by taxi cab medallion holders.

Each case in the Commerce Court is assigned to a single judge from commencement of the action to conclusion.  Each judge, who has an individual docket, is responsible for management of cases, including all discovery disputes, motion practice, scheduling all conferences, exploring settlement alternatives and setting a trial date as well as conducting the trial.

The Commerce Court is fortunate to have a dedicated group of five Court Administrative Officers and law clerks who assist the judges and the parties in the management and resolution of Commerce Court cases.  In addition, in excess of 100 members of the commercial bar serve as court appointed judges pro tempore (JPT), receivers and discovery masters in Commerce Court cases.

A major objective of the Commerce Court is vigorous case management with a view towards resolution of the dispute.  Approximately three months after a Commerce case is begun, the case will be scheduled for a case management conference with a court administrative officer to discuss scheduling issues.  Also the case will be assigned a track – expedited, standard or complex.  All pleadings are filed electronically and extensive procedures exist for filing matters under seal.  Once discovery and dispositive motions are complete, the case will be scheduled for a settlement conference with one of the program’s JPTs who provide invaluable assistance in the resolution of cases.  Any unresolved cases are then scheduled for trial.

In 2017, approximately 1800 cases were filed in the Commerce Program. During calendar year 2017, the Commerce Court disposed of 639 commercial matters.  90% of these complex business cases were disposed with 24 months of the date they were filed.  In 2018, as of June 30, 2018, approximately 972 cases were filed.  Through June Term 2018, Commerce Court judges disposed of 345 commercial cases.  96% of these cases were disposed of within 24 months of the date they were filed.