INTERNAL OPERATING PROCEDURES OF APPELLATE COURTS

• NCJ Number: 68251
• Author(s): R A LEFLAR
• Date Published: 1976
• Length: 156 pages
• Corporate Author: American Bar Foundation
• Sale Source: American Bar Foundation
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

THE ORGANIZATION, OPERATING PROCEDURES, AND ADMINISTRATION OF APPELLATE COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES ARE DISCUSSED, WITH EMPHASIS ON APPELLATE JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS, SUPERVISION OF APPEALS, AND THE DECISION PROCESS.

Abstract

THE UNITED STATES HAS AS MANY APPELLATE PROCEDURAL SYSTEMS AS APPELLATE COURTS. APPELLATE COURTS INCLUDE THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, 50 STATE SUPREME COURTS, 11 FEDERAL COURTS OF APPEALS, 60 OR MORE STATE INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURTS, AND OTHER STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS WITH LIMITED OR SPECIAL JURISDICTION. THE NUMBER OF INTERMEDIATE LEVEL COURTS IS GROWING AS APPEALS INCREASE AND LAWMAKERS SEEK TO RELIEVE OVERCROWDED DOCKETS. IN ONLY A FEW STATES ARE ALL INTERMEDIATE COURTS GOVERNED BY ONE SET OF RULES, AND INTERNAL PRACTICES MAY DIFFER AMONG THEM. ALL OF THE FEDERAL COURTS OF APPEALS ARE GOVERNED BY THE FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE, BUT PROCEDURAL PRACTICES VARY CONSIDERABLY. IN SOME STATES NO MEANINGFUL COORDINATION OF THE PROCEDURES FOLLOWED IN DIFFERENT APPELLATE DISTRICTS EXISTS, AND THE PUBLIC HAS CONSISTENTLY DEMANDED GREATER EFFICIENCY IN APPELLATE JUSTICE. THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM AT THE APPELLATE LEVEL SHOULD PROVIDE EXPEDITIOUS REVIEW OF TRIAL COURT DECISIONS TO RECTIFY ERRONEOUS RESULTS, ENSURE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE THROUGHOUT THE STATE, AND PROVIDE AUTHORITATIVE EXPRESSION OF DEVELOPING LAW. A SUBSTANTIAL PART OF THE INEFFICIENCY THAT IS REGULARLY CHARGED TO THE APPELLATE PROCESS IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE TIME LAG BETWEEN THE TRIAL COURT DECISION AND INITIATION OF THE APPEALS PROCESS. ONE JUDICIAL AGENCY SHOULD TAKE ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR APPEALS INITIATION. TODAY, THE COURTS AND ITS CRITICS ARE EXAMINING ALL PRACTICES RELATED TO THE DECISIONMAKING PROCESS FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCREASING EFFICIENCY. FOR EXAMPLE, IT WOULD BE WORTHWHILE FOR APPELLATE COURTS TO REEXAMINE BRIEFING RULES WITH A VIEW TO ELIMINATING UNNECESSARY REQUIREMENTS. ALTHOUGH STAFFS OF APPELLATE COURTS CONTINUE TO INCREASE, INTERMEDIATE COURTS APPEAR TO BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE REMEDY FOR MANY STATES WITH LARGE APPELLATE CASELOADS. FOOTNOTES AND AN INDEX ARE INCLUDED.