PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 11, 1998
Prescribes conditions for the appointment of a master to carry out functions with respect to an action before a Federal court. Requires the individual appointed to be a resident of the State in which the action is pending. Permits any party to the action to petition the court for removal of the master: (1) without cause (but no party may file more than one petition) within ten days after receiving notice of the appointment; and (2) at any time for misfeasance or malfeasance in office, for noncompliance with the residency requirement, or if the master's duties are duplicative of those of an existing official of the political subdivision with respect to which the action was brought. Directs the court, within 21 days after such petition is filed, to hold a hearing for the purpose of ruling on such a petition.
People & committees
Rep. Manzullo, Donald A. [R-IL-16] · R–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property.
Referred to the House Committee on the 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: Jan 16, 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.3183 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.3183 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.3183 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.3183 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.