Circuit Court · Last amended July 1, 2023 · Last verified July 13, 2026
In one sentenceRule 2-504.1 sets out when a Maryland circuit court must, or may, order the parties to a scheduling conference before the scheduling order issues, and what the parties are expected to prepare and attempt to agree on before they get there.
(a)When required. — In any of the following circumstances, the court shall issue an order requiring the parties to attend a scheduling conference, in person or by remote electronic participation pursuant to Title 21 of these Rules:
(1)in an action placed or likely to be placed in a scheduling category for which the case management plan adopted pursuant to Rule 16-302 (b) requires a scheduling conference;
(2)in an action in which an objection to computer-generated evidence is filed under Rule 2-504.3 (d);
(3)in an action in which jury selection or any other significant proceeding will be conducted by remote electronic participation; or
(4)in an action in which a party requests a scheduling conference and represents that, despite a good faith effort, the parties have been unable to reach an agreement (A) on a plan for the scheduling and completion of discovery, (B) on the proposal of any party to pursue an available and appropriate form of alternative dispute resolution, or (C) on any other matter eligible for inclusion in a scheduling order under Rule 2-504.
(b)When permitted. — The court may issue an order in any action requiring the parties to attend a scheduling conference.
(c)Order for scheduling conference. — An order setting a scheduling conference may require that the parties, at least ten days before the conference:
(1)complete sufficient initial discovery to enable them to participate in the conference meaningfully and in good faith and to make decisions regarding (A) settlement, (B) consideration of available and appropriate forms of alternative dispute resolution, (C) limitation of issues, (D) stipulations, (E) any issues relating to preserving discoverable information, (F) any issues relating to discovery of electronically stored information, including the form in which it is to be produced, (G) any issues relating to claims of privilege or of protection, and (H) other matters that may be considered at the conference; and
(2)confer in person or by telephone and attempt to reach agreement or narrow the areas of disagreement regarding the matters that may be considered at the conference and determine whether the action or any issues in the action are suitable for referral to an alternative dispute resolution in accordance with Title 17, Chapters 100 and 200 of these rules.
(1)its identification and retention;
(2)the form of production, such as PDF, TIFF, or JPEG files, or native form, for example, Microsoft Word, Excel, etc.;
(3)the manner of production, such as CD-ROM;
(4)any production of indices;
(5)any electronic numbering of documents and information;
(6)apportionment of costs for production of electronically stored information not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost;
(7)a process by which the parties may assert claims of privilege or of protection after production; and
(8)whether the parties agree to refer discovery disputes to a magistrate or Special Magistrate.
The parties may also need to address any request for metadata, for example, information embedded in an electronic data file that describes how, when, and by whom it was created, received, accessed, or modified or how it is formatted. For a discussion of metadata and factors to consider in determining the extent to which metadata should be preserved and produced in a particular case, see, The Sedona Conference, The Sedona Principles: Best Practices Recommendations and Principles for Addressing Electronic Document Production, (2d ed. 2007), Principle 12 and related Comment.
(d)Time and method of holding conference. — Except (1) upon agreement of the parties, (2) upon a finding of good cause by the court, or (3) in an action assigned to a family division under Rule 16-307 (a)(2), a scheduling conference shall not be held earlier than 30 days after the date of the order. If the court requires the completion of any discovery pursuant to section (c) of this Rule, it shall afford the parties a reasonable opportunity to complete the discovery. The court may hold a scheduling conference in chambers, in open court, or by telephone or other electronic means.
(e)Scheduling order. — Case management decisions made by the court at or as a result of a scheduling conference shall be included in a scheduling order entered pursuant to Rule 2-504. A court may not order a party or counsel for a party to participate in an alternative dispute resolution under Rule 2-504 except in accordance with Rule 9-205 or Rule 17-201.
Amendment History
Added June 7, 1994, effective Oct. 1, 1994; amended June 10, 1997, effective July 1, 1997; Feb. 10, 1998, effective July 1, 1998; Oct. 5, 1998, effective Jan. 1, 1999; Mar. 5, 2001, effective July 1, 2001; Dec. 4, 2007, effective Jan. 1, 2008; November 1, 2012, effective January 1, 2013; September 17, 2015, effective January 1, 2016; June 6, 2016, effective July 1, 2016; July 8, 2021, effective Oct. 1, 2021; April 21, 2023, effective July 1, 2023.
Committee Note & Source
Committee note. Examples of matters that may be considered at a scheduling conference when discovery of electronically stored information is expected, include:
Source. This Rule is new.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 2-504.1 identifies four situations where a scheduling conference isn't optional: the case falls into a category that the court's case-management plan under Rule 16-302(b) requires a conference for; a party has objected to computer-generated evidence under Rule 2-504.3(d); jury selection or another significant proceeding will happen by remote electronic participation; or a party asks for a conference and represents, in good faith, that the parties couldn't agree on a discovery plan, an alternative dispute resolution proposal, or another matter that could go into a scheduling order under Rule 2-504. Beyond those triggers, Rule 2-504.1(b) leaves the court free to order a scheduling conference in any action, whether or not one of those four circumstances applies.
When the court sets a conference, it can require the parties, at least ten days beforehand, to complete enough initial discovery to participate meaningfully and in good faith, covering settlement posture, available forms of alternative dispute resolution, narrowing the issues, stipulations, and any issues around preserving or producing electronically stored information or asserting privilege. The parties also have to confer, in person or by phone, and try to reach agreement or at least narrow their disagreements, including whether the case is suited to referral for alternative dispute resolution. Timing is protected on both ends: absent agreement, a showing of good cause, or a family-division assignment, the conference can't be held earlier than 30 days after the order setting it, and if the court has ordered pre-conference discovery, the parties get a reasonable opportunity to complete it first. The conference itself can happen in chambers, in open court, or by phone or other electronic means.
Whatever case-management decisions come out of the conference get folded into the scheduling order entered under Rule 2-504. One limit travels with that authority: the court can't order a party or attorney into alternative dispute resolution through this process except as Rule 9-205 or Rule 17-201 separately allow.
Frequently Asked Questions
When does a Maryland court require a scheduling conference?
Rule 2-504.1(a) requires one in four situations: the case falls into a category the case-management plan designates for a conference, a party objects to computer-generated evidence under Rule 2-504.3(d), jury selection or another significant proceeding will be conducted remotely, or a party requests a conference and shows a good-faith failure to reach agreement on discovery, alternative dispute resolution, or other scheduling matters.
Can I ask for a scheduling conference if opposing counsel won't cooperate on discovery?
Yes. Rule 2-504.1(a)(4) lets a party request a conference by representing that, despite a good-faith effort, the parties haven't been able to agree on a discovery plan, a proposed form of alternative dispute resolution, or any other matter eligible for the scheduling order.
How soon can a scheduling conference be held after the court orders one?
Under Rule 2-504.1(d), the conference generally can't be held earlier than 30 days after the date of the order, unless the parties agree otherwise, the court finds good cause, or the case is assigned to a family division.
What do parties have to do before a Maryland scheduling conference?
Rule 2-504.1(c) can require the parties, at least ten days beforehand, to complete enough initial discovery to participate meaningfully and to confer, in person or by phone, in an effort to reach agreement or narrow disagreements on settlement, discovery, alternative dispute resolution, and related matters.
Can a Maryland court force me into mediation at a scheduling conference?
Not through Rule 2-504.1 alone. Rule 2-504.1(e) states that a court may not order a party or attorney to participate in alternative dispute resolution except in accordance with Rule 9-205 or Rule 17-201.
Source & verification. Rule text, Committee Note, Source note, and
amendment history are reproduced verbatim from the Maryland Rules, adopted by the
Supreme Court of Maryland. Last verified July 13, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as:maryland scheduling conferencepretrial scheduling conference marylandcase management conference maryland civilalternative dispute resolution referral maryland