(a) TRIAL BY CONSENT; POWERS; PROCEDURE.
(1) In General. When authorized under D.C. Code § 11-1732 (a) and (j)(5) and specifically designated to exercise such jurisdiction by the Chief Judge, a magistrate judge may, if all parties consent, conduct any or all uncontested or contested proceedings, determine nondispositive and dispositive pretrial matters, make findings and enter final judgments and orders in a civil case. Rule 62 applies to judgments entered by a magistrate judge. A record of the proceedings must be made in accordance with Rule 201.
(2) Limitations on Power. A magistrate judge may not preside over a jury trial or exercise the contempt power.
(3) Implied Consent. A party who fails to file an answer, if an answer is required, or to otherwise appear in an action, is deemed to have consented that a magistrate judge conduct all proceedings in the case, unless the court subsequently determines for good cause that the party should be permitted to withdraw its implied consent.
(4) Withdrawing Express Consent. A party who has expressly consented to a magistrate judge may be permitted to withdraw that consent only on a showing of extraordinary circumstances.
(5) Jury Demand. Whenever a jury demand is timely made or a request for a jury trial is otherwise granted by the court, the case will be transferred to an associate judge notwithstanding the parties’ previous express or implied consent to a magistrate judge.
(b) APPEALING A JUDGMENT.
(1) Initial Judicial Review. Judicial review of a final order or judgment entered on the direction of a magistrate judge is available:
(A) on motion of a party to the Superior Court judge designated by the Chief Judge to conduct such reviews; or
(B) on the initiative of the judge so designated.
(2) Further Appeal. After the Superior Court judge completes judicial review, a party may appeal to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
(3) Standard of Review. The Superior Court judge reviewing a magistrate judge's final order or judgment must apply the same standard of review used by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals when reviewing a judgment or order of the Superior Court.
(4) On Motion
(A) Motion Requirements. The motion for review must:
(i) be filed and served within 14 days after entry of the order or judgment;
(ii) designate the order or judgment, or part of the order or judgment, for which review is sought; and
(iii) specify the grounds for objection to the magistrate judge's order or judgment, or part of the order or judgment.
(B) Answer to Motion. Within 14 days after being served with the motion for review, a party may file and serve a response.
(C) Judicial Review. The judge designated by the Chief Judge must review those portions of the magistrate judge's order or judgment to which objection is made. The judge may decide the motion for review with or without a hearing and may affirm, reverse, modify, or remand, in whole or in part, the magistrate judge's order or judgment.
(5) Review on Initiative of the Court. Not later than 30 days after entry of a magistrate judge's final order or judgment, the judge designated by the Chief Judge may sua sponte review the order or judgment in whole or in part. After giving the parties due notice and opportunity to make written submissions on the matter, the judge, with or without a hearing, may affirm, reverse, modify, or remand, in whole or in part, the magistrate judge's order or judgment.
(6) Termination of Time for Filing Motion for Review. The running of the time for filing a motion for review or for a judge to undertake review on the judge's own initiative is terminated as to all parties by the timely filing of any of the following motions with the magistrate judge by any party, and the full time for review from the judgment entered by the magistrate judge commences to run anew from entry of the order disposing of the last such remaining motion:
(A) for judgment as a matter of law;
(B) to amend or make additional factual findings, whether or not granting the motion would alter the judgment;
(C) to vacate, alter, or amend the order or judgment;
(D) for a new trial; or
(E) for relief from a judgment or order if the motion is filed no later than 14 days after the judgment is entered.
(7) Interlocutory Motion for Review. An interlocutory decision or order by a magistrate judge, which, if made by a judge of this court, could be appealed under any provision of law, may be reviewed by the judge designated by the Chief Judge by filing a motion for review within 14 days after entry of the decision or order. Review of such interlocutory decisions or orders will not stay the proceedings before the magistrate judge unless the magistrate judge or the reviewing judge so orders.
(8) Extension of Time to File Motion for Review. On a showing of excusable neglect and notice to the parties, the judge designated by the Chief Judge may, before or after the time prescribed by Rule 73(b)(4)(A)(i) or (b)(7) has expired, extend the time for filing a motion for review of a magistrate judge's order or judgment for a period not to exceed 21 days from the expiration of the time otherwise prescribed by this rule.
(9) Stay Pending Review. On a showing that the magistrate judge has refused or otherwise failed to stay the judgment pending review under this rule, the movant may, with reasonable notice to all parties, apply to the judge designated by the Chief Judge for a stay. The stay may be conditioned on the filing of a bond or other appropriate security.
(10) Dismissal. For failure to comply with this rule or any other rule or order, the judge may take any action as is deemed appropriate, including dismissal of the motion for review. The judge also may dismiss the motion for review on the filing of a stipulation signed by all parties, or on motion and notice by the movant.
(1) Show Cause Hearing. A magistrate judge may order a person to show cause before the Presiding Judge of the Civil Division, or his or her designee, why the person should not be held in civil or criminal contempt for disobedience or resistance to any lawful order, process, or writ issued by the magistrate judge or for any other act or conduct committed before a magistrate judge, which if committed before a Superior Court judge would constitute contempt.
(2) Show Cause Order Requirements. An order to show cause why the person should not be held in contempt must:
(A) state the time and place of hearing, allowing a reasonable time for the preparation of the defense; and
(B) state the essential facts constituting the contempt charged and describe it.
(d) OTHER POWERS. The authority of a magistrate judge in the Civil Division includes the power to:
(1) refer cases, where a jury demand is filed or a party does not consent to a magistrate judge, previously assigned to a magistrate judge's calendar to the clerk's office for redistribution pursuant to Rule 40-I;
(2) issue or quash a bench warrant for parties who fail to appear in court on a magistrate judge's calendar;
(3) conduct oral examinations; and
(4) rule on the following motions in cases assigned to any magistrate judge's calendar:
(A) to continue trial or hearing dates;
(B) to extend any period of time prescribed or allowed by these rules or by order of the court; and
(C) to enter or withdraw appearances.
(e) CERTIFICATION. In the interest of justice, the Presiding Judge may, on his or her own initiative or on the recommendation of the magistrate judge presiding over the case, certify a case for assignment to a judge in the Civil Division.
A magistrate judge in the Civil Division can take on the full role of a judge in a civil case, but only with consent. Rule 73 spells out how that consent works and what it does not cover. Consent can be express, or it can be implied: a defendant who never files an answer or otherwise shows up in the case is treated as having agreed to let the magistrate judge run the whole proceeding, though the court can still let that party back out later for good cause. Express consent is much harder to undo — a party who has affirmatively agreed to a magistrate judge can withdraw only on a showing of extraordinary circumstances. Either way, consent has limits built in: a magistrate judge cannot preside over a jury trial or exercise the contempt power, and a timely jury demand pulls the case away from the magistrate judge and over to an associate judge regardless of earlier consent.
When a magistrate judge enters a final order or judgment, Rule 73 gives the losing party two ways to get it looked at by a Superior Court judge. A party can move for review within 14 days of entry, naming the specific order or portion of it being challenged and the grounds for objection; the other side then has 14 days to respond. The reviewing judge — the one the Chief Judge has designated for this purpose — looks only at the parts of the order or judgment being challenged and can affirm, reverse, modify, or send the matter back, with or without a hearing, applying the same standard of review the Court of Appeals would use in reviewing a Superior Court judgment. Separately, that same judge can review a magistrate judge's decision on their own initiative within 30 days of entry, after giving the parties notice and a chance to submit written arguments. Only after this Superior Court review is complete can a party take the case up to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
Several supporting provisions round out the review process. Certain post-judgment motions — for judgment as a matter of law, to alter or amend findings or the judgment, for a new trial, or for relief from judgment filed within 14 days — pause the clock on review until the magistrate judge rules on them. Interlocutory orders that could otherwise be appealed if entered by a judge can be brought before the reviewing judge by motion within 14 days, though that review does not automatically stop the underlying proceedings. A party can also ask for more time to file a motion for review on a showing of excusable neglect, capped at a 21-day extension, or ask for a stay of the judgment pending review, which the reviewing judge can condition on a bond.
Beyond trial and review, Rule 73 gives magistrate judges a handful of other tools: they can order someone to show cause before the Presiding Judge of the Civil Division why they should not be held in contempt, issue or quash bench warrants for parties who miss a court date, conduct oral examinations, and rule on routine motions like continuances, time extensions, and entering or withdrawing appearances. And in the interest of justice, the Presiding Judge can pull a case away from a magistrate judge entirely and certify it to an associate judge, either on the Presiding Judge's own initiative or at the magistrate judge's recommendation.