Rutter Group Explained

Commercial:Yes
Language:English
Owner:Thomson Reuters
Launch Date:1979

The Rutter Group, founded by William Rutter,[1] with Linda A. Diamond, is a business of Thomson Reuters that publishes materials for lawyers and judges in the United States, with a particular focus on California. The Rutter Group is well known for its Rutter Group Practice Guides, which are written and edited by famous lawyers and judges.[2] Courts have cited these treatises in almost 8,000 legal opinions, and they have been called the 'bible' for litigators.[3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Many of the cases that the treatises cite point back directly to the Rutter text as the original source of the legal principle applied. When this occurs, the Rutter treatises include the parenthetical "citing text" when listing the cases.[8]

Because the publications are non-binding, courts may sometimes expressly decline to follow them.[9] However, both California and federal courts have repeatedly identified Rutter treatises as "well-respected" interpretations of the law,[10] which may be cited as "redoubtable" authority.[11] The California Court of Appeal has treated the existence of conflicting Rutter Group authority as strong evidence that a legal question was unsettled and therefore not an appropriate basis for sanctioning an attorney.[12]

The Rutter Group also sponsors panel discussions regarding recent changes in the law, and the judges it hires to participate in these events must disclose the compensation they receive because it could potentially be a conflict of interests.[13]

Rutter treatises

The Rutter Group now publishes more than twenty-five treatises, which are available both in print and through Westlaw. They are considered one of the primary reasons that many attorneys subscribe to Westlaw instead of its competitor, Lexis.

The print versions of the Rutter Group treatises were historically distributed as interfiled looseleaf services in ring binders, meaning that only the pages that had changed during a particular year were printed and sent. In 2020, Rutter Group began to send comprehensive updates. Subscribers are now instructed to replace all pages and to keep only the tabbed chapter dividers originally provided with their ring binders.

Subjects include:

External links

Notes and References

  1. Web site: Obituary of William A. Rutter.
  2. Web site: TRG. Frequently Asked Questions. 21 February 2013.
  3. California Civil Procedure, 2012, Walter H. Helser, at pp. 7 & 24.
  4. "California Legal Research: Citing the Witkin Treatises," Santa Clara Law, http://lawguides.scu.edu/content.php?pid=95565&sid=714991
  5. See, e.g., Scalf v. D.B. Log Homes, Inc. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1510, 1525; Diepenbrock v. Brown (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 743, 746-47; J.B. Aguerre, Inc. v. American Guarantee & Liability Ins. Co. (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 6, 13
  6. As of 9-2-2015 the Rutter Group had been cited in 7,703 opinions from federal and state courts. (WestlawNext, strict:"rutter group," All State & Federal, https://a.next.westlaw.com)
  7. Plaintiff Magazine, Dec 2008, Tami Kamin-Meyer, "Westlaw versus Lexis"
  8. (See e.g., California Practice Guide, Insurance Litigation, Chapter 7B-I § 7:707 & 7:708.5
  9. See, e.g., Forte Capital Partners, LLC v. Harris Cramer, LLP (N.D. Cal., July 21, 2009, C-07-1237 EMC) 2009 WL 2175629 ("As for. . .the Rutter Group treatise, the Court notes that it is only a treatise, and not binding authority")
  10. Aleman v. AirTouch Cellular (2011) 202 Cal.App.4th 117 [134 Cal.Rptr.3d 643, 656-57]; NOS Communications, Inc. v. Sprint Communications Co., L.P. (Cal. Ct. App., Nov. 3, 2003, B165005) 2003 WL 22476236; In re Marriage of Crane (Cal. Ct. App., May 31, 2006, A109921) 2006 WL 1493771; Cisneros v. Vueve (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 906, 912, fn. 4; VW Credit, Inc. v. Keuylian (Cal. Ct. App., July 26, 2012, G044632) 2012 WL 3039757, fn.6, Bennigson v. Alsdorf (Cal. Ct. App., Apr. 15, 2004, B168200) 2004 WL 803616;Albert v. Satellite Management Co. (Cal. Ct. App., May 16, 2008, E042093) 2008 WL 2070605; Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus Inc. (N.D. Cal., Jan. 21, 2008, CV-00-20905 RMW) 2008 WL 190990; Winston v. Taylor (Cal. Ct. App., Sept. 27, 2006, C048373) 2006 WL 2766211; Chen v. Union Bank of California (Cal. Ct. App., Nov. 26, 2002, G030014) 2002 WL 31664335; Diamond v. County of Sacramento (E.D. Cal., Jan. 31, 2006, CIV. 05-1606DFLDAD) 2006 WL 236902)
  11. Allen v. Stoddard (2013) 212 Cal.App.4th 807 [152 Cal.Rptr.3d 71]
  12. Diepenbrock v. Brown (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 743, 749 [145 Cal.Rptr.3d 659, 663]
  13. California Fair Political Practices Commission - March 13, 1999 Letter to the Honorable Richard M. Sims III "Re: Your Request for Advice," 1992 WL 778701

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Rutter Group".

Except where otherwise indicated, Everything.Explained.Today is © Copyright 2009-2024, A B Cryer, All Rights Reserved. Cookie policy.