← Back to Insights

Court Exhibit Formatting: A Guide for All 94 Federal Districts


Preparing exhibits for federal court filing requires more than a label and a page number. Each of the 94 federal district courts has its own local rules governing how exhibits should be identified, formatted, and presented. Getting this wrong — even on something as seemingly minor as label placement or format — can result in rejected filings, delayed proceedings, and embarrassed clients.

This post explains how exhibit formatting requirements work across federal courts and how ExhibitStampPro handles this automatically.


Why exhibit formatting varies by district

Federal courts operate under two layers of rules: the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP), which apply nationally, and Local Rules, which each district sets independently. The FRCP governs what must be disclosed and when — but the Local Rules govern how documents must be formatted, labeled, and presented.

For exhibits specifically, Local Rules typically address:

  • Label format — Whether exhibits use alphabetic labels (Plaintiff's Exhibit A), numeric labels (Exhibit 1), or alphanumeric combinations (PLF-001)
  • Party designation — Whether the label must identify the designating party (Plaintiff's, Defendant's, Joint)
  • Placement — Where on the page the exhibit label appears
  • Continuation pages — Whether subsequent pages of a multi-page exhibit must also be labeled

The Southern District of New York has specific requirements that differ from the Northern District of California, which differ again from the District of Delaware — a court that handles a disproportionate share of complex commercial litigation and has its own well-established exhibit conventions.


The most commonly used federal districts for litigation

While all 94 districts handle federal matters, certain courts see a concentration of litigation activity:

Commercial and securities litigation:

  • S.D.N.Y. — Southern District of New York
  • D. Del. — District of Delaware
  • N.D. Cal. — Northern District of California

Employment and class actions:

  • C.D. Cal. — Central District of California
  • N.D. Ill. — Northern District of Illinois
  • S.D. Fla. — Southern District of Florida

Patent litigation:

  • W.D. Tex. — Western District of Texas
  • D. Del. — District of Delaware
  • N.D. Cal. — Northern District of California

Government and regulatory matters:

  • D.D.C. — District of Columbia

Each of these courts has its own exhibit formatting conventions. For attorneys practicing across multiple districts, tracking these differences manually is a significant administrative burden.


How ExhibitStampPro handles this

ExhibitStampPro pre-loads the exhibit formatting rules for all 94 federal district courts. When you create a matter and select a jurisdiction, the system automatically applies the correct format to every exhibit in that matter.

You do not need to know the specific rules for each court. You select the district, and ExhibitStampPro handles:

  • The correct label format for that district
  • The correct party designation language
  • The correct stamp placement
  • The correct continuation page format

If a case is transferred to a different district, you update the jurisdiction in the matter settings and click Re-stamp. Every exhibit is regenerated with the new district's formatting in a single operation.


International jurisdictions

Beyond the 94 US federal districts, ExhibitStampPro also supports:

Canada — Federal Court of Canada and provincial superior courts

Australia — Federal Court of Australia and state supreme courts including New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, and South Australia

United Kingdom — High Court of Justice divisions including the Technology and Construction Court and the Commercial Court


The cost of getting it wrong

Improperly formatted exhibits create real problems:

Rejected filings — Clerks will reject exhibit packages that do not comply with local rules, requiring resubmission and potentially missing deadlines.

Judicial irritation — Non-compliant formatting signals lack of attention to detail and can color a court's perception of counsel.

Malpractice exposure — In cases where a filing is delayed due to formatting errors, the firm may face professional responsibility issues.

Rework cost — Re-stamping 200 exhibits manually because the original format was wrong for the assigned district can consume an entire paralegal day.

ExhibitStampPro eliminates this risk. The format is correct for the selected district before the first exhibit is stamped.


Starting a new matter

When you create a matter in ExhibitStampPro, you select:

  1. Jurisdiction — the specific federal district or international court
  2. Case number — appears on every exhibit stamp
  3. Party designation — Plaintiff's, Defendant's, or Joint

From that point, every PDF you upload and stamp is formatted correctly for that court. If you need to adjust any of these settings after exhibits have been stamped, update the matter and use Re-stamp all to regenerate every exhibit in one click.


ExhibitStampPro supports all 94 US federal districts plus Canadian, Australian, and UK jurisdictions. Start your 7-day free trial at exhibitstamppro.com.

Share this post