Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 6 P8 doc

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allow a judgment to be amended by a motion served within ten days after the judgment is entered.. Under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedu

Trang 1

respective service and, in some cases, to the secretary of the department

The public has been given a look at judge advocates through film and television For example, the movie A Few Good Men (1992) portrays judge advocates as prosecutors for military crimes However, the duties of a judge advocate extend far beyond the military court-room Since the 1970s, judge advocates have played a key role in the planning of military strategy for top-secret missions and other wartime issues Further, judge advocates, along with commanding officers of the armed services, take part in the development and application of rules of engagement, which guide U.S troops in their use of force

One of the most important rules that involve judge advocates is target planning When decid-ing whether somethdecid-ing is a proper target,

a judge advocate must first determine that it is

a military necessity for the enemy If it passes the first test, the judge advocate must investigate whether civilians will be affected Finally, judge advocates must perform a balancing test The possible loss of civilians and their property—

often referred to as“collateral damage”—cannot

be excessive, as compared to the military gain achieved by the attacks Judge advocates also identify targets that are off-limits In these war-time contexts, target selection clearly becomes

a life-or-death decision

During the VIETNAM WAR, only one judge advocate was called upon by the U.S Air Force

to give operations law advice Major Walter Reed, who would later become judge advocate general of the U.S Air Force, advised which targets were restricted by the military’s rules of engagement and the Law of War, the codified laws created by the Hague Convention in 1907,

to which most nations adhere However, in 1972 Air Force General John D Lavelle attacked targets in North Vietnam and thus violated the rules of engagement

Lavelle claimed that his superiors had supported the attacks and that the targets had been included in the rules of engagement when,

in fact, they had not been It then became clear that the drafting, training, and execution of the rules of engagement needed more careful review

The Joint Chiefs of Staff Peacetime Rules of Engagement (later renamed the Standing Rules

of Engagement) were established, and judge advocates were called upon to interpret the rules

and to advise combat commanders in the planning and execution of military operations Now, judge advocates are the primary developers

of the rules of engagement and their application for military missions All use of force must be authorized by these rules In addition, the rules must be clear, yet flexible, so that a soldier is able

to make an on-the-spot decision in critical situations

During Operation Desert Shield and Opera-tion Desert Storm, more than 250 judge advocates were stationed in Saudi Arabia The judge advocates provided significant support, which included the review of all target lists, the training of troops on the rules of engagement, parachuting in with army troops, and deciding the issue of whether the enemy could be buried alive—to which the answer was yes The judge advocates printed pocket-size cards, which pro-vided peacetime and wartime rules, for troops

to carry

The important role played by judge advo-cates continued as the United States attacked Afghanistan, in 2001, and Iraq, in 2003, as part

of theWAR ON TERRORISM The capture, incarcer-ation, and trial of enemy combatants required judge advocates to representTERRORISMsuspects

A number of judge advocates objected to the rules governing the military commissions that would try the prisoners, arguing that they violated constitutional principles In addition, some of the judge advocates sought HABEAS CORPUSrights for the prisoners they represented The U.S Supreme Court agreed in two cases, ruling that prisoners could file petitions for habeas corpus that challenged their imprisonment

FURTHER READINGS Judge Advocate General ’s Legal Center and School Website Available online at www.jagcnet.army.mil/tjagsa (accessed October 17, 2009).

JUDGMENT

A decision by a court or other tribunal that resolves

a controversy and determines the rights and obligations of the parties

A judgment is the final part of a court case

A valid judgment resolves all the contested issues and terminates the lawsuit, because it is regarded as the court’s official pronouncement

of the law on the action that was pending before

it It states who wins the case and what remedies the winner is awarded Remedies may include money damages, injunctive relief, or both

58 JUDGMENT

Trang 2

A judgment also signifies the end of the court’s

jurisdiction in the case The Federal Rules ofCIVIL

PROCEDUREand most state rules of civil procedure

allow appeals only from final judgments

A judgment must be in writing and must

clearly show that all the issues have been

adjudicated It must specifically indicate the

parties for and against whom it is given

Monetary judgments must be definite, specified

with certainty, and expressed in words rather

than figures Judgments affecting real property

must contain an explicit description of the

realty so that the land can easily be identified

Once a court makes a judgment, it must be

dated and docketed with the court

adminis-trator’s office Prior to modern computer

data-bases, judgments were entered in a docket book,

in alphabetic order, so that interested outsiders

could have official notice of them An index of

judgments was prepared by theCOURT

ADMINIS-TRATOR for record keeping and notification

purposes Most courts record their judgments

electronically and maintain computer docketing

and index information Though the means of

storing the information are different, the basic

process remains the same

A court may amend its judgment to correct

inaccuracies or ambiguities that might cause its

actual intent to be misconstrued Omissions,

erroneous inclusions, and descriptions are

cor-rectable However, persons who were not parties

to the action cannot be brought into the lawsuit

by an amended judgment The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allow a judgment to be amended

by a motion served within ten days after the judgment is entered State rules of civil proce-dure also permit amendment of a judgment

Different types of judgments are made, based

on the process the court uses to make the final decision A judgment on the merits is a decision arrived at after the facts have been presented and the court has reached a final determination

of which party is correct For example, in a

NEGLIGENCElawsuit that is tried to a jury, the final decision will result in a judgment on the merits

A judgment based solely on a procedural error is a dismissal WITHOUT PREJUDICE and generally will not be considered a judgment on the merits A party whose case is dismissed without prejudice can bring the suit again as long as the procedural errors are corrected

A party that receives a judgment on the merits is barred from relitigating the same issue by the doctrine ofRES JUDICATA This doctrine establishes the principle that an issue that is judicially decided is decided once and for all

A summary judgment may occur very early

in the process of a lawsuit Under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and analogous state rules, any party may make a motion for

a summary judgment on a claim, counterclaim,

or CROSS-CLAIM when he or she believes that

Enforcement of Foreign Judgments

T

B

he principle of territoriality generally limits the

power of a state of judicial enforcement of

actions to be taken within its territory Consequently,

when a judgment is to be enforced out of property in

another state, or requires some act to be done in that

other state, the judgment must be brought to the

judicial tribunals of the second state for

implementa-tion This allows the judicial tribunal of the enforcing

state to examine the judgment to determine whether it

should be recognized and enforced

Conditions for recognizing and enforcing a

judgment of a court of another country may be

established by treaty or follow general principles

of international law Under those principles, a court

of one state will enforce a foreign judgment if (1) the judgment is final between the parties; (2) the court that granted the judgment was competent

to do so and had jurisdiction over the parties;

(3) regular proceedings were followed that allowed the losing party a chance to be heard; (4) no fraud was worked upon the first court; and (5) enforce-ment will not violate the public policy of the enforcing state

JUDGMENT 59

Trang 3

there is no genuine issue of material fact and that he or she is entitled to prevail as aMATTER OF LAW A motion for summary judgment can be directed toward the entire claim or defense or toward any portion of the claim or defense

A court determines whether to grant summary judgment

A JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICTis

a judgment in favor of one party despite a

VERDICTin favor of the opposing litigant A court may enter a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, thereby overruling the jury verdict, if the court believes there was insufficient evidence

to justify the jury’s decision

A consent judgment, or agreed judgment, is

a final decision that is entered on agreement of the litigants It is examined and evaluated by the court, and, if sanctioned by the court, is ordered

to be recorded as a binding judgment Consent judgments are generally rendered in domestic relations cases after the husband and wife agree

to a property and support settlement in a divorce

ADEFAULT JUDGMENTresults from the named defendant’s failure to appear in court or from one party’s failure to take appropriate proce-dural steps It is entered upon the failure of the party to appear or to plead at an appropriate time Before a default judgment is entered, the

DEFENDANT must be properly served notice of the pending action The failure to appear or answer is considered an admission of the truth

of the opposing party’s pleading, which forms the basis for a default judgment

A DEFICIENCY JUDGMENT involves a creditor and a debtor Upon a debtor’s failure to pay his or her obligations, a deficiency judgment is rendered in favor of the creditor for the difference between the amount of the indebtedness and the sum derived from a judicial sale of the debtor’s property held in order to repay the debt

Once a judgment is entered, thePREVAILING PARTY may use it to collect damages This may include placing a judgment LIEN on the losing party’s real property, garnishing (collecting from an employer) the losing party’s salary, or attaching the losing party’s PERSONAL PROPERTY

A judgment lien is a claim against the real estate

of a party; the real estate cannot be sold until the judgment holder is paid Attachment is the physical seizure of property owned by the losing party by a law officer, usually a sheriff, who gives the property to the person holding the judgment

Under theFULL FAITH AND CREDIT CLAUSEof the Constitution, a judgment by a state court must be fully recognized and respected by every other state For example, suppose the prevailing party

in a California case knows that the defendant has assets in Arizona that could be used to pay the judgment The prevailing party may docket the California judgment in the Arizona county court where the defendant’s property is located With the judgment now in effect in Arizona, the prevailing party may obtain a writ of execution that will authorize the sheriff in that Arizona county to seize the property to satisfy the judgment

Once a judgment has been paid by the losing party in a lawsuit, that party is entitled to

a formal discharge of the obligation, known as

a satisfaction of judgment This satisfaction is acknowledged or certified on the judgment docket

FURTHER READINGS Farnsworth, Ward 2007 The Legal Analyst: A Toolkit for Thinking about the Law Chicago: Univ of Chicago Press McCarter, W Dudley, and Christopher L Kanzler 2000.

“Dismissal without Prejudice: A Trap For the Unwary!” Journal of the Missouri Bar 56.

Tunick, Mark 2000 Practices and Principles: Approaches to Ethical and Legal Judgment Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ Press.

JUDGMENT CREDITOR

A party to which a debt is owed that has proved the debt in a legal proceeding and that is entitled

to use judicial process to collect the debt; the owner

of an unsatisfied court decision

A party that wins a monetary award in a lawsuit is known as a judgment creditor until the award is paid, or satisfied The losing party, which must pay the award, is known as a judgment debtor A judgment creditor is legally entitled to enforce the debt with the assistance of the court State laws provide remedies to a judgment creditor in collecting the amount of the judg-ment These measures bring the debtor’s property into the custody of the court in order

to satisfy the debtor’s obligation: They involve the seizure of property and money The process

of enforcing the judgment debt in this way is called execution The process commences with

a hearing called a supplementary proceeding The judgment debtor is summoned to appear before the court for a hearing to determine the nature and value of the debtor’s property

60 JUDGMENT CREDITOR

Trang 4

If the property is subject to execution, the court

orders the debtor to relinquish it

Because debtors sometimes fail to surrender

property to the court, other means of satisfying

the debt may be necessary In these cases the law

refers to an unsatisfied execution—an

outstand-ing and unfulfilled order by the court for

property to be given up Usually this will lead

the judgment creditor to seek a writ of

attach-ment, the legal means by which property is

seized To secure a writ of attachment, the

judgment creditor must first place a judgment

LIEN on the property Also called an

encum-brance, a lien is a legal claim on the debtor’s

property that gives the creditor a qualified right

to it Creditors holding liens are called secured

creditors The writ of attachment sets in motion

the process of a levy, by which a sheriff or other

state official actually seizes the property and takes

it into the physical possession of the court The

property can then be sold to satisfy the debt

Occasionally the judgment creditor is

frus-trated in the course of enforcing a judgment

debt Debtors may transfer property to another

owner, which makes collection through

attach-ment more difficult Liens on property usually

prevent the transfer of ownership Where a

transfer of ownership has occurred, state laws

usually allow the judgment creditor to sue the

third party who now possesses the property

Some states provide additional statutory relief to

creditors in cases where debtors fraudulently

transfer assets in order to escape a judgment

debt Florida’s Uniform Fraudulent Transfer

Act (Fla Stat § 726.101 et seq.), for instance,

allows creditors more time to pursue

enforce-ment of the debt

Another process for recovery is garnishment,

which targets the judgment debtor’s salary or

income Through garnishment a portion of the

judgment debtor’s income is regularly deducted

and paid to the judgment creditor The creditor

is known as a garnishor, and the debtor as a

garnishee

FURTHER READINGS

Bakale, Anthony 2005 “When Is an Assignee or Judgment

Creditor Taxed on Partnership Income? ” The Tax Adviser

(July 30).

Blum, Brain A 2006 Bankruptcy and Debtor/Creditor.

Frederick, MD: Aspen.

Lippman, Steven N 1996 “Proceedings Supplementary and

Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act Dual Remedies to

Execute against a Judgment Debtor’s Transferred

Assets ” Florida Bar Journal 70 (January).

JUDGMENT DEBTOR

A party against which an unsatisfied court decision

is awarded; a person who is obligated to satisfy a court decision

The term judgment debtor describes a party against which a court has made a monetary award If a court renders a judgment involving money damages, the losing party must satisfy the amount of the award, which is called the judgment debt Such a decision gives the winner

of the suit, or judgment creditor, the right to recover the debt, or award, through extraordi-nary means, and the court may help the creditor

do so State law governs how the debt may be recovered Although the recovery process can be harsh, the law provides the debtor with certain rights and protection

Following the VERDICT, other legal steps are usually taken against the judgment debtor The court can order the debtor to appear for an oral hearing to assess the debtor’s assets If it is determined that the debtor has assets sufficient

to satisfy the judgment debt, the court may order the debtor to surrender certain property

to it Commonly the judgment creditor must take additional legal action This involves seeking the court’s assistance in seizing the debtor’s property, by the process known as attachment,

or a portion of the debtor’s salary, by the process called garnishment

For centuries, attachment of property was allowed ex parte—without first allowing the

DEFENDANT debtor to argue against it However, contemporary law affords the debtor some pro-tection The debtor has the right to minimal due process States generally require that the judgment creditor first secure a writ of attachment, that the debtor be given notice before seizure occurs, and that the debtor have the right to a prompt hearing afterward to challenge the seizure

Other protections apply to both property and wages First, not every kind of property is subject to attachment States provide exemptions for certain household items, clothing, tools, and other essentials Additional provisions may protect individuals in cases of extreme hardship

Where the creditor seeks garnishment in order

to seize the judgment debtor’s wages, laws generally exempt a certain amount of the salary that is necessary for personal or family support

Courts can exercise their discretion to go beyond the statutory protections for judgment debtors They can exempt more property from

JUDGMENT DEBTOR 61

Trang 5

attachment than that specified in a statute In some cases they can also deny the attachment or garnishment altogether This can occur when the creditor seeks more in property than the value of the judgment debt, or where the property sought is an ongoing business that would be destroyed by an attachment

JUDGMENT DOCKET

A list under which judicial orders of a particular court are recorded by a clerk or other designated officer to be available for inspection by the public

A judgment docket serves an important function by providing parties interested in learning of the existence of a judgment or a

LIEN on property to enforce a judgment with access to such information The recording of a judgment in a judgment docket is considered official notice to all parties of its existence The rules of procedure of the particular court govern the maintenance of the judgment docket

JUDGMENT NOTE

A promissory note authorizing an attorney, holder,

or clerk of court to appear for the maker of the note and confess, or assent to, a judgment to be entered against the maker due to default in the payment of the amount owed

A judgment note is also called a COGNOVIT NOTEand is invalid in many states

JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT

A judgment entered by the court in favor of one party even though the jury returned a verdict for the opposing party

The phrase“judgment notwithstanding the verdict” is abbreviated JNOV, which stands for its Latin equivalent, judgment “non obstante veredicto.” The remedy of JNOV applies only in cases decided by a jury Originally this remedy could be entered only in favor of thePLAINTIFF, and the similar remedy ofARREST OF JUDGMENT

could be entered only in favor of theDEFENDANT Under modern law a JNOV is generally available

to both plaintiffs and defendants, and an arrest

of judgment is primarily used with judgments

in criminal cases A JNOV is proper when the court finds that the party bearing theBURDEN OF PROOFfails to make out aPRIMA FACIEcase (a case

that on first appearance will prevail unless contradicted by evidence)

To be granted relief by a JNOV, a party must make a motion seeking that relief The motion generally must be made in writing and must set forth the specific reasons entitling the party to relief Many statutes and rules require that the moving party must have previously sought aDIRECTED VERDICT, and that the grounds for the JNOV motion be the same or nearly the same as those for the directed VERDICT A directed verdict is a request by a party that the judge enter a verdict in that party’s behalf before the case is submitted to the jury

Although a jury generally must return a verdict before a motion for JNOV can be made,

if the jury does not agree on a verdict, as in a jury deadlocked, some courts will hear a motion for JNOV However, some statutes do not permit

a court to hear a motion for JNOV under such circumstances

In deciding a motion for JNOV, the court

is facing questions only of law, not fact The court must consider only the evidence and any inferences therefrom, and must do so in the light most advantageous to the nonmoving party The court must resolve any conflicts in favor of the party resisting the motion If there is enough evidence to make out a prima facie case against the moving party, or evidence tending to support the verdict, then the court must deny the motion for JNOV Some courts maintain that if there is a conflict of evidence, such that the jury could decide either way based on factors such as the credibility of witnesses, the court should deny the motion Courts approach motions for JNOV with extreme caution and generally will grant them only in clear cases in which the evidence overwhelmingly supports the moving party

In entering a JNOV, the court is simply reversing the jury’s verdict; the motion cannot

be the basis for increasing or decreasing the verdict When granting a JNOV, the court needs

to independently assess the damages or order

a new trial on the issue of damages

Under the Federal Rules ofCIVIL PROCEDURE, both a JNOV and a motion for directed verdict are now encompassed within a motion for judgment as aMATTER OF LAW The change is one

of terminology only and not of substance Many state statutes or rules of court provide for the remedy of a JNOV, although they may call it something different The applicable state statutes

62 JUDGMENT DOCKET

Trang 6

or rules are substantially similar to the federal

rules

A motion for JNOV is made at the close of

all the evidence, after the jury returns a verdict,

within a period of time specified by statute An

order granting a motion for a JNOV is often

considered a delayed-action directed verdict

because it presents the same issues In fact, in

some jurisdictions the denial of a motion for a

directed verdict is a prerequisite to the entry of a

JNOV If the particular case involves several

plaintiffs or defendants, each of them must

separately make a proper motion for a directed

verdict in order to move properly for a JNOV

later Current procedure holds a motion for

JNOV proper when a prior motion for a directed

verdict has been denied If the court denies a

motion for a directed verdict after all the

evidence has been presented, then the court is

deemed to have submitted the case to the jury

subject to a later determination of the legal issues

raised by the motion, and the court may grant a

motion for JNOV after the jury returns a verdict

To promote judicial economy, some

sta-tutes, including the federal rules, permit a party

to make alternative motions for a JNOV and for

a new trial Those motions can also be made

separately The statutes that permit the

alterna-tive motions generally provide that the motions

should be decided together, such that the trial

court’s rulings can be reviewed together on

appeal If the court denies the motion for a new

trial, then the alternative motion for JNOV is

also assumed to be denied If the court grants

the motion for a new trial, then the motion for

JNOV is deemed to be effectively disposed of

or denied The court does not have to rule on

the motion for JNOV if the motion presents

the same issues on which the court ruled in

considering motions for a directed verdict and

for a new trial Some court rules and statutes,

including the federal rules, provide that a court

may grant both of the alternative motions, even

though they are inconsistent Courts may avoid

the inconsistency by providing that the ruling

granting a new trial is effective only if the ruling

granting a JNOV is overturned on appeal In

fact, federal courts have held that it is the duty

of the trial court to so condition an order

granting these alternative motions

FURTHER READINGS

Clarkson, Kenneth W., et al Business Law: Tex and Cases.

Eagan, MN: West.

Parker, Joel A 1999 “Capping Judicial Discretion: Drawing the Line for Oregon Trial Judges in Granting Motions for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict of a New Trial in Civil Cases ” Oregon Law Review 78 (summer).

Available online at https://scholarsbank.uoregon.

edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1794/4437/parker.pdf?

sequence=1; website home page: https://scholarsbank.

uoregon.edu (accessed September 14, 2009).

Postel, Theodore 1999 “Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict ” Chicago Daily Law Bulletin 145 (January 6).

Wisotsky, Steven 2009 Professional Judgment on Appeal.

Durham, NC: Carolina Academic.

Yeazell, Stephen C 2009 Federal Rules of Civil Procedures:

With Selected Statutes and Cases Frederick, Md.: Aspen.

JUDGMENT PROOF

A term used to describe an individual who is financially unable to pay an adverse court decision awarding a sum of money to the opposing party

A judgment-proof individual has no money

or property within the jurisdiction of the court

to satisfy the judgment or is protected by wage laws that exempt salaries and property from formal judicial process

JUDICARE

To decide or determine in a judicial manner

In civil and oldENGLISH LAW, judicare means

to judge, to pass judgment or sentence, or to decide an issue in an impartial fashion It refers

to the interpretation and application of the laws

to the facts and the administration of justice

JUDICATURE

A term used to describe the judicial branch of government; the judiciary; or those connected with the court system

Judicature refers to those officers who admi-nister justice and keep the peace It signifies a tribunal or court of justice

The JUDICATURE ACTS of England are the laws that established the present court system in England

JUDICATURE ACTS English statutes that govern and revise the organi-zation of the judiciary

Parliament enacted a series of statutes in

1873 during the reign of Queen Victoria that changed and restructured the court system of England Consolidated and called theJUDICATURE

Act of 1873, these enactments became effective

on November 1, 1875, but were later amended

JUDICATURE ACTS 63

Trang 7

in 1877 As a result, superior courts were consolidated to form one supreme court of judicature with two divisions, the High Court of Justice, primarily endowed with ORIGINAL JURIS-DICTION, and the COURT OF APPEAL, which possessed appellate jurisdiction

The current court system of England is organized according to the Judicature Acts, which were redrafted in 1925 as the Supreme Court of Judicature (Consolidation) Act and which made the Court of Appeals, consisting of

a civil division and criminal division, the center

of the English judiciary

JUDICIAL Relating to the courts or belonging to the office of

a judge; a term pertaining to the administration of justice, the courts, or a judge, as in judicial power

A judicial act involves an exercise of discre-tion or an unbiased decision by a court or judge,

as opposed to a ministerial, clerical, or routine procedure A judicial act affects the rights of the parties or property brought before the court It

is the interpretation and application of the law

to a particular set of facts contested by litigants

in a court of law, resulting from discretion and based upon an evaluation of the evidence presented at a hearing Judicial connotes the power to punish, sentence, and resolve conflicts

JUDICIAL ACTION The adjudication by the court of a controversy by hearing the cause and determining the respective rights of the parties

A judgment, decree, or decision rendered

by a court, which concerns a contested issue brought before the tribunal by parties who voluntarily appear or who have been notified to appear bySERVICE OF PROCESS It is the interpre-tation, application, and enforcement of existing law relating to a particular set of facts in a particular case.JUDICIAL ACTIONis the determina-tion of the rights and interests of adverse parties

Judicial action is taken only when a justiciable controversy arises or where a claim

of right is asserted against a party who has an interest in contesting that claim A court does not make a decision when a hypothetical dif-ference exists but only when there is an actual controversy affecting the rights and interests

of the parties

JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION The practices, procedures, and offices that deal with the management of the administrative systems

of the courts

Judicial administration, also referred to as court administration, is concerned with the day-to-day and long-range activities of the court system Every court in the United States has some form of administrative structure that seeks

to enhance the work of judges and to provide services to attorneys and citizens who use the judicial system Since the 1970s the administra-tion of the courts has played a central role in the judiciary’s response to increased court filings and shrinking budgets

The administration of the courts has tradi-tionally been concerned with overseeing budgets, selecting juror pools, assigning judges to cases, creating court calendars of activities, and super-vising nonjudicial personnel Often administra-tive decisions are made by judges, either individually or as a group Clerks of court, now more commonly known as court administrators, and their staff are called on to accept the filing

of court documents, to maintain a file system of cases and a record of all final judgments, and to process paperwork generated by judges

Early in the twentieth century,ROSCOE POUND,

a noted jurist and scholar, called for the reform

of court administration to ensure efficiency, accuracy, and consistency in the judicial system Nevertheless, few systematic attempts to mod-ernize and rationalize courts were made until the early 1970s In 1971 the creation of the National Center for State Courts (NCSC)—an independent, nonprofit organization dedicated

to the improvement of justice—provided local and state courts with technical assistance on how to modernize The NCSC, located in Williamsburg, Virginia, was started at the urging of Chief Justice WARREN E BURGER, who saw a need for leadership in this field

The staffing of administrative personnel in the courts has changed since the 1970s The Institute for Court Management (ICM), a division of the NCSC, develops court leaders through education, training, and a court executive development program The ICM has provided valuable assistance to thousands of court administrators in the United States, disseminating information on new methods and techniques of court administration More court administrators now have college and

64 JUDICIAL

Trang 8

advanced degrees, and many have attended law

school

Judicial administration has largely been

taken over by court managers State courts are

organized at the state level, under the direction

of a state COURT ADMINISTRATOR State court

administration oversees legislative budgets,

per-sonnel administration, and court research and

planning Planning for the future is an integral

part of the administrative agenda The federal

courts are organized somewhat differently

There is at least one U.S district court in each

state, but states with larger populations have

two or more There is a clerk of court in each

federal district who has duties similar to that

of a state court administrator

Court administrators explore alternative

ways of managing court cases, often by

statisti-cal research Various systems of case

manage-ment are employed in the United States, but the

trend has been to seek methods that reduce

the amount of time a case remains active in the

courts Consequently, judges often have less

control over their time as court managers set

out the work that must be accomplished

Computers have also reshaped the

adminis-tration of the courts Before the 1980s courts

recorded everything on paper With the

inte-gration of computers and database software,

case information is now recorded and retrieved

electronically The use of new technology has

improved the efficiency of court administration

Appellate courts distribute court opinions and

court rules through computer bulletin boards

and the Internet Some courts allow access to

their database information through computer

modems

Another function of judicial administration

is to eliminate bias Many state court systems

have appointed committees and task forces to

investigate racial and gender bias in the courts

Court administrators have been charged with

developing ways of eliminating bias, ensuring

diversity in the court system, and providing

easier access to the courts for pro se litigants, also

called pro per litigants in some jurisdictions,

(persons representing themselves without an

attorney) The certification of court interpreters

for testimony given in languages other than

English has emerged as a leading issue in court

administration

New divisions of administrative oversight

have developed since the 1970s Offices of

PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY, which administer and investigate ethical complaints against law-yers, are commonplace Many states require that lawyers take CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION

(CLE) courses so as to maintain professional competence Offices have been created in state court administration to accredit CLE programs and to monitor compliance by lawyers

JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE Aid offered by the judicial tribunals of one state

to the judicial tribunals of a second state

Judicial assistance may consist of the en-forcement of a judgment rendered by a court of another state or other actions to assist current judicial proceedings taking place in the state requesting the cooperation of the foreign court

A letter rogatory, the formal term for such a request, asks a foreign court to take some judicial action, such as issue a summons, compel pro-duction of documents, or take evidence Treaties may be concluded between countries to establish regular methods of transmitting these requests and to assure reciprocal treatment in furnishing assistance

CROSS REFERENCE Letters Rogatory.

JUDICIAL CONDUCT SeeCODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE

OF THE UNITED STATES The JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES

formulates the administrative policies for the federal courts The Judicial Conference also makes recommendations on a wide range of topics that relate to the federal courts The conference is chaired by the chief justice of the U.S Supreme Court Other members include the chief judge of each federal judicial circuit, one district judge from each federal judicial circuit, and the chief judge of the U.S Court of International Trade

The Judicial Conference was created in response to a need for uniformity in rules and procedures in the federal court system In the early 1920s, Chief JusticeWILLIAM H.TAFT, of the Supreme Court, led a reform effort that urged centralized review of federal district courts

Until that time, the procedures and practices in

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES 65

Trang 9

federal trial courts varied widely from circuit to circuit, causing confusion among attorneys and judges The result of the reform effort was the passage in 1922 of a federal statute that created the Conference of Senior Circuit Judges (Pub L

No 67-297, 423 Stat 837, 838) The Conference

of Senior Circuit Judges was renamed the Judicial Conference of the United States in

1948 (Act of June 25, 1948, ch 646, 62 Stat 902,

§ 331[codified as amended at 28 U.S.C.A § 331 (1988)])

The Judicial Conference is a creation of Congress, and it has only the powers that Congress gives it Its membership and duties have been expanded by Congress, but its primary missions have remained the same

The Judicial Conference performs two major functions The first is to study and offer impro-vements on federal court rules and procedures

These rules and procedures cover matters ranging from the sentencing of a criminalDEFENDANTto the service of a complaint and court summons

on a civil defendant The second major function

of the Judicial Conference is to supervise the administration of the federal courts

In its administrative capacity, the Judicial Conference oversees the Administrative Office

of the U.S Courts This is the administrative nerve center of the federal courts The Judicial Conference formulates the fiscal and personnel policies for the federal courts, and the Admin-istrative Office implements those policies

The Judicial Conference also reviews orders that judicial councils for the federal circuits issue on complaints of judicial misconduct or judicial disability, and it may reassign federal judges to different federal courts The final decision on administrative matters that are not covered by existing statutes, rules, and regula-tions is made by the judicial council of the appropriate federal circuit

The Judicial Conference recommends ways

to improve rules and procedures in the federal courts Its recommendations do not carry the force of law, but the conference is widely recognized as the authority on federal court rules and procedures

The Judicial Conference makes yearly sug-gestions on legislation to Congress and recom-mendations on federal court rules to the U.S

Supreme Court The Supreme Court fashions the rules for federal courts and submits them to

Congress for final approval The attorney general

of the United States, by request of the chief justice of the Supreme Court, is required to report to the Judicial Conference on the business

of the federal courts Under the Judicial Con-ference statute, 28 U.S.C.A 331, the attorney general’s reports must discuss with particularity the progress of cases in which the U.S gov-ernment is a party

The Judicial Conference may offer its opinion on legislation passed by Congress that affects the rules and procedures of the federal courts For example, in 1990 the Federal Courts Study Commission of the Judicial Conference released a study that was critical of federal legislation on mandatory minimum sentences for criminal defendants Also in the 1990s, the Judicial Conference publicly opposed federal legislation that limited the right of a criminal defendant to file HABEAS CORPUS petitions in federal court For persons in prison, habeas corpus petitions are usually the last chance for court review of their criminal conviction The Judicial Conference has established committees that specialize in certain topics, including court schedules (known as dockets), court budgets, judicial conduct, and the disclo-sure of finances by judges and the federal courts Other committees supervise the support

of specialized federal court features, such as the offices of public defenders, probation officers, and magistrates (judicial officers who make decisions on pretrial matters)

Although the power of the Judicial Confer-ence is limited to administrative matters, these matters can be controversial and far reaching For example, the Judicial Conference has author-ity over the presence of cameras in federal courtrooms In 1994 it voted to discontinue a three-year experiment allowing cameras to film civil trials in some federal courts A majority of the Judicial Conference members expressed a fear that cameras could affect the outcome of a trial The decision drew criticism from many legal circles, and in March 1995 the Judicial Confer-ence said that it would reconsider its position

on the issue In March 1996 the Conference decided to ban cameras in all federal courts except for federal appeals courts The Conference allowed each circuit to decide whether it would allow cameras in its appeals courts

There have been legislative attempts to compel the federal courts to permit cameras

66 JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES

Trang 10

in federal courtrooms These attempts arose

under a bill known as the Sunshine in the

Courtroom Act, which was first introduced in

Congress in 2001 The Sunshine in the

Court-room Act would effectively open federal

court-rooms to television and radio coverage Although

the legislation was reintroduced in Congress

several times, as of March 2009 a bill to provide

for media coverage of federal court proceedings

has yet to become law

Most states permit some form of electronic

coverage of state court proceedings Under

current law, federal courts continue to ban

television and radio coverage of federal criminal

and civil proceedings at both the trial and

appellate levels

Định dạng
Số trang	10
Dung lượng	146,93 KB