June 25, 1948, ch. 64662 Stat. 961May 24, 1949, ch. 139, § 10263 Stat. 104Pub. L. 100–702, title IV, § 403(a)(1)102 Stat. 4650(, ; , ; , , .)
Historical and Revision Notes
Act1948
section 1111 of title 26Mar. 3, 1887, ch. 359, § 424 Stat. 506Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 23136 Stat. 1132Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, § 187(a)Oct. 10, 1940, ch. 843, § 154 Stat. 1101Feb. 13, 1925, ch. 229, § 1343 Stat. 941Mar. 2, 1929, ch. 488, § 145 Stat. 1475Feb. 10, 1939, ch. 2, § 111153 Stat. 160Oct. 21, 1942, ch. 61956 Stat. 957Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §§ 219, 263, 296, 307, 723, 731, and 761, and , U.S.C., 1940 ed., Internal Revenue Code (R.S. §§ 913, 918; , ; , §§ 122, 157, 194, 291, 297, , 1139, 1145, 1167, 1168; , as added , ; , ; , ; , ; , title V, § 504(a), (c), ).
Section 1111 of title 26Sections 219, 263, 296, 307, 723, and 731 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., gave specified courts, other than the Supreme Court, power to make rules. Section 761 of such title related to rules established in the district courts and Court of Claims. , U.S.C., 1940 ed., related to Tax Court. This section consolidates all such provisions. For other provisions of such sections, see Distribution Table.
Recognition by Congress of the broad rule-making power of the courts will make it possible for the courts to prescribe complete and uniform modes of procedure, and alleviate, at least in part, the necessity of searching in two places, namely in the Acts of Congress and in the rules of the courts, for procedural requisites.
Former Attorney General Cummings recently said: “Legislative bodies have neither the time to inquire objectively into the details of judicial procedure nor the opportunity to determine the necessity for amendment or change. Frequently such legislation has been enacted for the purpose of meeting particular problems or supposed difficulties, but the results have usually been confusing or otherwise unsatisfactory. Comprehensive action has been lacking for the obvious reason that the professional nature of the task would leave the legislature little time for matters of substance and statesmanship. It often happened that an admitted need for change, even in limited areas, could not be secured.”—The New Criminal Rules—Another Triumph of the Democratic Process. American Bar Association Journal, May 1945.
Provisions of sections 263 and 296 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., authorizing the Court of Claims and Customs Court to punish for contempt, were omitted as covered by H. R. 1600, § 401, 80th Congress, for revision of the Criminal Code.
section 1111 of title 26Dempster Mill. Mfg. Co. v. BurnetProvisions of , U.S.C., 1940 ed., making applicable to Tax Court Proceedings “the rules of evidence applicable in the courts of the District of Columbia in the type of proceeding which, prior to , were within the jurisdiction of the courts of equity of said District,” were omitted as unnecessary and inconsistent with other provisions of law relating to the Federal courts. The rules of evidence in Tax Court proceedings are the same as those which apply to civil procedure in other courts. See , 1931, 46 F.2d 604, 60 App.D.C. 23.
section 25(e) of title 17section 205(a) of title 11For rule-making power of the Supreme Court in copyright infringement actions, see , U.S.C., 1940 ed., Copyrights. See, also, , U.S.C., 1940 ed., Bankruptcy, authorizing the Supreme Court to promulgate rules relating to service of process in railroad reorganization proceedings.
Senate Revision Amendment
section 1111 of Title 26By Senate amendment, all provisions relating to the Tax Court were eliminated. Therefore, , U.S.C., Internal Revenue Code, was not one of the sources of this section as finally enacted. However, no change in the text of this section was necessary. See 80th Congress Senate Report No. 1559.
Act1949
section 2071 of title 28This amendment clarifies , U.S.C., by giving express recognition to the power of the Supreme Court to prescribe its own rules and by giving a better description of its procedural rules.
Editorial Notes
Amendments
Pub. L. 100–702section 2072 of this title1988— designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), substituted “under ” for “by the Supreme Court”, and added subsecs. (b) to (f).
1949—Act , expressed recognition to the Supreme Court’s power to prescribe its own rules and give a better description of its procedural rules.
Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries
Effective Date of 1988 Amendment
Pub. L. 100–702, title IV, § 407102 Stat. 4652
Effective Date of 1983 Amendment
Pub. L. 97–462, § 496 Stat. 2530
Short Title of 1983 Amendment
Pub. L. 97–462, § 196 Stat. 2527
Savings Provision
Pub. L. 100–702, title IV, § 406102 Stat. 4652
Rulemaking Authority of Supreme Court and Judicial Conference
Pub. L. 109–2, § 8119 Stat. 14
Tax Court Rulemaking Not Affected
Pub. L. 100–702, title IV, § 405102 Stat. 4652
Court Rules
Admiralty Rules
The Rules of Practice in Admiralty and Maritime Cases, promulgated by the Supreme Court on , effective , as revised, amended, and supplemented, were rescinded, effective , in accordance with the general unification of civil and admiralty procedure which became effective . Provision for certain distinctly maritime remedies were preserved however in the Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims, rules A to F, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Appendix to this title. The Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims were subsequently renamed the Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions.