On May 15, 2013, the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued an opinion in Lassiter v. City of Philadelphia holding that the district court's sua sponte observation at an FRCP 16 pretrial conference that the statute of limitations had apparently expired was appropriate.

The plaintiff, Robert Lassiter, filed a complaint against the City of Philadelphia and three city employees. The defendants' answer did not plead the statute of limitations as a defense. At the FRCP 16 conference, the district court observed that the statute of limitations appeared to have run and provided an opportunity for the defendants to file an amended answer. The defendants amended the answer to add a statute of limitations defense and then moved for judgment on the pleadings. The district court granted the motion and dismissed the complaint as time-barred.

On appeal, Lassiter argued primarily that the district court improperly raised the statute of limitations defense sua sponte at the pretrial conference.

The Third Circuit rejected Lassiter's arguments. First, it held that FRCP 16 gives district courts wide discretion in managing cases. The district court's raising of the statute of limitations issue was, for the Third Circuit, a proper exercise of its discretion designed "to prevent the needless waste of judicial resources."

The Third Circuit observed that, unlike in the out-of-circuit precedents relied on by Lassiter, the district court raised the statute of limitations issue early in the case and ruled on it only after the defendants made a motion and the plaintiff responded. That opportunity to respond before the district court ruled also undercut Lassiter's argument that the district court had effectively acted as defense counsel.

Lassiter v. City of Philadelphia is a reminder to counsel that district courts have considerable discretion, particularly at FRCP 16 pretrial conferences, to manage cases in a way that minimizes wasted time and resources and expedites proceedings. Even sua sponte raising of issues may be proper, if they are important issues to case management and if the parties have a chance to respond.