Also known as: ex-parte motion · ex parte motions · ex parte
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A procedural request submitted to a court for consideration without prior notice to the adverse party. The court may rule on the request without hearing from all sides. Such motions are permitted only when authorized by law or rule and when the moving party satisfies any applicable showing of need or emergency.
Eugene Ellsworth filed an ex parte motion for a scheduling change in pending litigation against Edgewater Capital. The judge reviewed the filing and set a new date without notifying Edgewater Capital's counsel. Edgewater Capital later moved to vacate the order on the ground that the communication was unauthorized.
Counsel for Mercy Hospital presented an ex parte motion seeking authority to consent to surgery for an unconscious patient. The lawyer disclosed only facts supporting the request and omitted the patient's documented religious objections. The court later found the presentation violated the duty of candor applicable to ex parte proceedings.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Elliot Edmonds sued a state labor commissioner in federal court seeking an order requiring installation of safety equipment. The complaint framed the relief as prospective compliance with federal law. The court permitted the action to proceed under the doctrine allowing suits against officers for ongoing violations.
Edgar Evers telephoned the judge's chambers to request a brief continuance in a pending case against Equinox Energy. The judge confirmed that the call addressed only timing and not substance. The judge then notified all parties of the conversation and gave them an opportunity to respond.
After the verdict, counsel for Echo Systems attempted to speak with a discharged juror about the deliberations. The juror declined the contact. Counsel recognized that further communication would require court authorization under the applicable rule.
Emma Erickson submitted an ex parte motion to reset a hearing date due to a sudden medical conflict. The judge determined that no party would obtain a tactical edge from the change. The judge promptly informed opposing counsel and allowed a response before granting the request.
A lawyer must disclose all material facts known to the lawyer that will enable the tribunal to make an informed decision, whether or not the facts are adverse. This heightened duty exists because the opposing party is absent and cannot supply missing information. Failure to disclose material adverse facts breaches the duty of candor.
A judge may consider an ex parte communication only when expressly authorized by law or when it concerns scheduling, administrative, or emergency purposes that do not address substantive matters. The judge must reasonably believe no party gains an advantage and must promptly notify all other parties of the substance and give them an opportunity to respond.
No. The doctrine permits only suits for prospective injunctive or declaratory relief to enjoin ongoing violations of federal law. Claims seeking compensation for past harm remain barred by the Eleventh Amendment.
…common-law tradition is one of live testimony in court subject to adversarial testing, while the civil-law tradition relies on ex parte examinations. Pp. 3–8. (b) The historical evidence leaves little doubt that the principal evil at which the Confrontation Clause was directed was the civil-law mode of criminal procedure,…