Discovery is the formal process of exchanging information under the supervision of the courts. Since managing discovery is costly, courts have implemented case management techniques to reduce motion practice in discovery. This study examines whether case management techniques can reduce the likelihood of a discovery dispute. We attempt to untangle the impact of specific judges from the use of a particular case management technique. We focus on the use of informal discovery conferences (IDCs) in which parties meet with the judge before filing a motion to compel. The problem with simply testing whether IDCs reduce the number of discovery motions is that the use of an IDC is likely endogenous. Our solution to this endogeneity is to use the random assignment of judges. Since some judges have a higher propensity to use IDCs and some courts have begun requiring them, we have two sources of policy variation. Using this estimation strategy, we find that IDCs reduce the number and presence of discovery motions. (JEL K13, K40, K41)

中文翻译：

---

多讨论，少冲突：来自要求召开非正式发现会议的证据

证据披露是在法院监督下交换信息的正式过程。由于管理证据开示的成本高昂，法院已实施案件管理技术来减少证据开示中的动议实践。本研究探讨案件管理技术是否可以减少发现争议的可能性。我们试图通过使用特定的案件管理技术来理清特定法官的影响。我们重点关注非正式证据开示会议 (IDC) 的使用，各方在提出强制动议之前与法官会面。简单测试 IDC 是否减少发现动议数量的问题在于 IDC 的使用可能是内生的。我们解决这种内生性的方法是使用法官的随机分配。由于一些法官更倾向于使用 IDC，并且一些法院已开始要求使用 IDC，因此我们有两个政策变化来源。使用这种估计策略，我们发现 IDC 减少了发现运动的数量和存在。(JEL K13、K40、K41)