A story in the February 15 Bar News on a court procedural rules discussion in the House Civil Justice Subcommittee erroneously said staffer David De La Paz did not detail some additional procedural rules which he said encroached on the Legislature’s substantive law authority. De La Paz did say those rules were given in a 2006 report that was included in the committee’s meeting backup materials. Also, De La Paz was paraphrased as saying that the court had not struck down any law affecting rules and then immediately reinstated the rules that were rescinded by the legislation. De La Paz did say that the Supreme Court, when it struck down the Death Penalty Reform Act of 2000, did replace collateral appeal rules enacted in that law with the rules the law had repealed. But De La Paz also said the court had no choice but to reinstate the previous rules to prevent a slew of challenges that would have resulted from the void of having no rules at all.