NCJ Number
185262
Journal
Justice System Journal Volume: 21 Issue: 3 Dated: 2000 Pages: 323-332
Date Published
2000
Length
10 pages
Annotation
This article reviews the case law pertinent to extrajudicial assignments for Federal judges, the end of the mayor's court, judicial temperament and media libel, technology and access to court records, whether the mediator must testify when settlements are challenged, and the charge of judicial misconduct brought by Judicial Watch against eight Clinton-appointed U.S. district judges in the District of Columbia.
Abstract
Regarding case law on extrajudicial assignments for Federal judges, the criteria are that the judge must be acting "in an individual, not judicial capacity," and "a particular extrajudicial assignment must not undermine the integrity of the Judicial Branch." In the case of Ohio's mayor-judge courts, the U.S. Supreme Court has not forbidden the mixture of executive and judicial functions as such, but has found a constitutional violation if the mayor's pay is increased by a fine the mayor imposed. In Piero v. City of Macedonia (6th Cir. 1999), the court held that "proof of actual temptation" (judicial bias by the mayor) was not required, only "the mere possibility of temptation to ignore the burden of proof." Another segment of this article considers the defamation suit against the ABC television network brought by California State judge Bruce Dodds, based on a 1994 broadcast in which the judge was said to use a crystal ball in deciding some of his cases. Another section of this article considers issues associated with Los Angeles County's Information Access Provider (IAP) Program, through which subscribers can, for a fee and upon signing an agreement imposing certain constraints, obtain electronic access to basic case information for civil cases. Case law pertinent to mediator testimony in settlement challenges from alternative dispute resolution favors the admissibility of the mediator's testimony. In the concluding section of this article, the judicial rationale for dismissing Judicial Watch's complaint against the Clinton-appointed judges is explained.