PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 268.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 30, 1993
Civil Rules Amendments Act of 1993 - Permits the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure which are embraced by an order entered by the Supreme Court on April 22, 1993, to take effect on December 1, 1993, with the following amendments. Amends proposed rule 26 to: (1) repeal certain requirements regarding initial disclosures by parties; and (2) permit a party to obtain discovery of the existence and contents of any insurance agreement under which any person carrying on an insurance business may be liable to satisfy part or all of a judgment which may be entered in the action or to indemnify or reimburse for payments made to satisfy the judgment. Specifies that: (1) information concerning the insurance agreement is not by reason of disclosure admissible in evidence at trial; and (2) an application for insurance shall not be treated as part of an insurance agreement for purposes of such provision. Amends proposed rule 30 to provide that, unless the court upon motion orders, or the parties agree in writing to use, sound or sound-and-visual means, depositions shall be recorded by stenographic means. Amends proposed form 35 to repeal provisions regarding pre-discovery disclosures.
People & committees
Rep. Hughes, William J. [D-NJ-2] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 268.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8744-8747)
Mr. Brooks moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 170.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 103-319.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 103-319.
Ordered to be Reported.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property and Judicial Administration.
Referred to the House Committee on Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 26, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2814 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2814 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2814 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2814 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.