NCJ Number
72640
Journal
California Law Review Volume: 68 Issue: 5 Dated: (September 1980) Pages: 937-1003
Date Published
1980
Length
67 pages
Annotation
This article explains how central legal staff can help a court to maintain a high level of productivity without undertaking functions that properly belong to judges; the experience of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is examined.
Abstract
Discussion focuses on the early history of the Ninth Circuit central staff; staff functions and staff organization; hiring and tenure policies; motions practice; and inventory, calendaring, and related functions. Preparation of bench memoranda, drafting of proposed dispositions, and efforts to develop a faster procedure for disposition of cases not requiring all the traditional appellate processes are also reviewed. Processing motions are discussed, and the article concludes that a central staff can efficiently perform all of the work relating to both substantive and procedural motions that is delegated to it. By drawing upon the individual and collective experience of its members, the staff can help the court to maintain consistency and continuity in its resolution of individual motions. To avoid conflicting decisions or duplication of work, a central staff can calendar appeals to best coordinate the resolution of similar cases and minimize duplication or conflict. Similarly, the staff can monitor cases after they have been calendared or submitted and draw the judges' attention to apparent or incipient conflicts. A thorough staff memorandum provides an offsetting safeguard for the limited amount of time that judges will spend on 'fast track' cases byassuring the litigants that the judge willhave all of the relevant material available, rather than just the allusions or summaries in the parties' briefs. Analysis of the Ninth Circuit Court's procedures reveals four important elements to preserve the integrity of the judicial function: (1) each judge has equal responsibility for every appeal on which he or she sits, at least until the case is assigned for the preparation of an opinion; (2) every case decided on merits is discussed at a conference, whether or not the panel hears an oral argument; (3) the staff does not draft opinions until the judges have considered the merits of the case; and (4) the court has a policy of hiring court law clerks directly out of law school for 1 or 2 years only. Footnotes are provided.