DOCSLIB.ORG

ADR in the Federal District Courts –District-By-District Summaries Revised March 2016

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ADR in the Federal District Courts –District-By-District Summaries Revised March 2016 ADR in the Federal District Courts –District-by-District Summaries revised March 2016 District How Voluntary is Provider of Payments for Attendance Sanctions Confidentiality the ADR process? Mediation Services Neutrals Requirement Available Completely voluntary - Judicial Officer. ALM “The [C]ourt strictly enforces the requires both parties’ See Mediating in the Alabama confidentiality of mediation.” consent. Parties are Middle District of Middle See L.R. 16.1; Mediating in the required, however, “to Alabama. Middle District of Alabama. consider whether mediation will assist the parties in resolving” their case. See L.R. 16.1; Mediating in the Middle District of Alabama. Ordered by the Court or The Court maintains a Panel neutrals are The Court may ALN Parties or “The parties and the mediator by agreement of all panel of private compensated at impose sanctions for Alabama representatives may not disclose information parties. If ordered, a neutrals. The neutral is reasonable rates agreed failure to attend Northern and their primary regarding the process, including party may file either selected by the to by the parties or set mediation attorneys must the terms of settlement, except as objections. If the Court or by agreement by the court. Parties conferences. attend mediation required by law or otherwise parties want to utilize a of all parties. split fees unless court See Alternative conferences. agreed by the parties. The form of ADR other See Alternative Dispute orders or parties agree Dispute Resolution See Alternative mediation process must be treated than mediation, the Resolution Plan. otherwise. Volunteer Plan. Dispute as a compromise negotiation or Court may permit them panel neutrals are asked Resolution Plan. purposes of the Federal Rules of to do so. to provide up to 5 hours Evidence and State rules of See L.R. 16.1; of uncompensated evidence.” Alternative Dispute services each year. See Alternative Dispute Resolution Plan. See Alternative Dispute Resolution Plan. Resolution Plan. District How Voluntary is Provider of Payments for Attendance Sanctions Confidentiality the ADR Process? Mediation Services Neutrals Requirement Available ALS Ordered by the Court or Magistrate Judge, panel Parties must bear Parties or The Court may The mediation process shall be Alabama by agreement of all neutral or appropriate expenses equally unless representatives impose sanctions for treated as a compromise Southern parties. If ordered, a neutral evaluator. otherwise agreed to by and their primary failure to attend negotiation for the purposes of party may file See L.R 16(d). the parties or ordered attorneys must mediation the FRE and State rules of objections. by the court. Mediator attend mediation conferences. evidence. As a result, any See L.R. 16(d); must be compensated at conferences. See Alternative information revealed and not Alternative Dispute a "reasonable rate.” Dispute Resolution otherwise known by the opposing Resolution Plan. See Alternative Dispute See Alternative Plan. party is inadmissible for any Resolution Plan. Dispute purpose absent a specific ruling Resolution Plan. by the Court. See Alternative Dispute Resolution Plan. AK The Court may order Either a private neutral Paid according to No communication by a mediator Alaska mediation upon the that the parties agree mediator's fee schedule. or any other person during the request of one or both upon, or a judicial Parties share cost mediation may be disclosed parties, or on the officer (who is not equally unless unless all parties and the mediator Court’s own motion. assigned to case and otherwise agreed on by consent. Mediation or settlement See L.R. 16.2. who consents to serve). parties or ordered by statements may not be disclosed See L.R. 16.2(e)(2). court. Court may without the parties’ express intervene if there is a consent and are not admissible in dispute regarding any proceeding. However, there compensation. See are some limited exceptions if L.R. 16.2(i). disclosure is (1) not prohibited by law; (2) necessary to prevent manifest injustice; and (3) necessity outweighs need for confidentiality. See L.R. 16.2(i). AZ The Court may order Magistrate judge. See Yes. See Yes. See Settlement “All communications and Arizona mediation or ENE; The L.R. 83.10 Settlement Conference Orders information exchanged during the Court may offer or the Conference Orders for Magistrate settlement process, not otherwise parties may request all for Magistrate Judges: Bade, discoverable, will not be other methods. Judges: Bade, Boyle, and Burns admissible in evidence for any See L.R. 83.10 Boyle, and Burns purpose.” See Boyle Order; see also Bade and Burns Orders. District How Voluntary is Provider of Payments for Attendance Sanctions Confidentiality the ADR Process? Mediation Services Neutrals Requirement Available ARE Parties must “consider” Magistrate judges are “Communications of litigants, Arkansas the use of ADR, except authorized to conduct attorneys and magistrate judges Eastern in exempted cases. settlement conferences. during the ADR process are amended See General Order 50. See General Order 50. confidential, and disclosure of 2012 these communications is prohibited.” See General Order 50. ARW Parties must "consider" Magistrate judges are “Communications of litigants, Arkansas the use of ADR, except authorized to conduct attorneys and magistrate judges Western in exempted cases. settlement conferences. during the ADR process are See General Order 32. See General Order 32. confidential, and disclosure of these communications is prohibited.” See General Order 32. CAC Cases are either Individual from Preparation time and Parties or a Sanctions may be Confidential information shall California presumptively referred Mediator Panel list; the first three hours are representative imposed. See include: written mediation Central to the Court - Directed District Judge, provided free of charge. with final General Order 11-10 statements; documents prepared ADR program or magistrate judge, or After three hours, the authority to settle (section 10). for purpose of, in the course of, or referred following an private neutral. See panel mediator may: (1) must attend. The pursuant to mediation; anything individual or joint General Order 11-10 permit the parties to Mediator has the that happened or was said relating request made during the (sections 3, 5 and 6). conclude mediation; (2) discretion to allow to the subject matter of the case in rule 26(f) conference. continue to mediate parties residing mediation; any position taken; Certain categories of without compensation; outside the district and any view of the merits of the cases are exempted or (3) continue to to participate by case expressed by any participant. from Court-Directed mediate at rates agreed telephone. Trial There are limited exceptions to ADR Program. See upon by neutral and Attorneys must the confidentiality rule and the General Order 11-10 parties. See General also be present. mediator may ask the parties to (sections 5 and 6). Order 11-10 See General Order sign a confidentiality agreement. (section 3). 11-10 (section 8). See General Order 11-10 (section 9). District How Voluntary is Provider of Payments for Attendance Sanctions Confidentiality the ADR Process? Mediation Services Neutrals Requirement Available CAE Cases are either Either a Voluntary Neutrals served without Parties and their Sanctions may be Except as provided in this rule California presumptively referred Dispute Resolution compensation. lead counsel are imposed. and except as otherwise required Eastern to the Voluntary Program (VDRP) See L.R. 271 required to attend See L.R. 271 by law, all communications made Dispute Resolution volunteer panel neutral (section G). in person. (section P). in any VDRP proceeding shall be Program (VDRP) or or a private neutral. Requests to attend privileged and confidential unless referred following an See L.R. 271 telephonically stipulated in writing by all parties joint request made by (section E). may be granted if and the Neutral. the parties. Certain attendance would See L.R. 271 (section M). categories of cases are impose a serious exempted from the and unjustifiable VDRP. Referral to hardship, but VDRP may be ordered requests may only for discrete subparts of be made after complex cases. conferring with See L.R. 271 (sections opposing counsel. A-C). See L.R. 271 (section L). CAN Most cases are ADR neutrals may be The ADR program Parties and their Sanctions may be Confidential information shall California automatically assigned individuals from the requires that neutrals lead counsel are imposed. include: written ADR statements; Northern to ADR. Cases may certified ADR panel, volunteer preparation required to attend See ADR L.R. 2-4. documents prepared for purpose also be assigned to legal staff of ADR time and the first four in person. of, in the course of, or pursuant to ADR following a joint Unit, private neutrals, hours. Afterwards, the Requests to attend ADR; anything that happened or stipulation by all or judicial officers. neutral may (1) telephonically was said relating to the subject parties, or by Court See ADR L.R. 2-5. continue to volunteer, may be granted if matter of the case in ADR; any order following a (2) conclude the ADR attendance would position taken; and any view of party’s motion or the procedure, or (3) be impose a serious the merits of the case expressed Court’s own initiative. paid a rate that the and unjustifiable by any participant. There are A party that has been parties agree to pay. hardship, but limited exceptions to this rule and automatically referred If necessary, other requests may only the ADR neutral may ask the to ADR may seek relief arrangements can be be made after parties to sign a confidentiality from automatic referral. made. Private ADR conferring with agreement. See ADR L.R. 5- See ADR L.R. 3-3. may be subject to opposing counsel. 12(ENE); 6-12 (Mediation); 7-4 different rules. See See ADR L.R.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names Working
    United Nations Group of Experts on Working Paper Geographical Names No. 46 Eighteenth Session Geneva, 12-23 August 1996 Item 5,9,14 of the Provisional Agenda (5) REPORTS OF TBE DIVISIONS (9) MEETING OF TI-IE WORKING GROUP ON TOPONYMIC DATA FILES AND GAZETTEERS (14) TOPONYMIC GUIDELINES FOR MAP AND OTHER EDITORS REPORT OF THE BRAZILIAN INSTITUTE OF GEOGRAPHY AND STATISTICS fIBGE) Submitted by Sonia Luiza Terron, Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, Rio de Janeiro. Report of the Brazilian Institute of Geogrqhy and Statistics ( IBGE ) Items 5 and 9 of the Provisional Agenda Recent Developments on Geoerapbical Names The Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, with regard to the 1996 Population and Housing Counts - 1096 Agricultural Census and among many other geographical activities of its responsibility, has updated the toponymic data related to populated places, political, statistical and geographical areas. These data are stored in the Territorial Structures Database, which was built to provide territorial support to the IBGE’s statistical and geographical programs. Since 1991 Demographic Census, the political and administrative division has been expressively changed. In addition to the 54 legal name changes of municipalities and districts, 483 new municipalities were settled in 1993, consequently modifying 496 of the 4,490 existing ones. Considering the district level, almost the same amount of new and modified units has occurred during this period. Furthermore, due to the administrative mobility, the category of populated places (seat of the new municipalities and districts) has been changed, as well as the location of geographical names (features) by administrative division has been updated.
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Stages of Federal Litigation: Overview
    Initial Stages of Federal Litigation: Overview MARCELLUS MCRAE AND ROXANNA IRAN, GIBSON DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP WITH HOLLY B. BIONDO AND ELIZABETH RICHARDSON-ROYER, WITH PRACTICAL LAW LITIGATION A Practice Note explaining the initial steps of a For more information on commencing a lawsuit in federal court, including initial considerations and drafting the case initiating civil lawsuit in US district courts and the major documents, see Practice Notes, Commencing a Federal Lawsuit: procedural and practical considerations counsel Initial Considerations (http://us.practicallaw.com/3-504-0061) and Commencing a Federal Lawsuit: Drafting the Complaint (http:// face during a lawsuit's early stages. Specifically, us.practicallaw.com/5-506-8600); see also Standard Document, this Note explains how to begin a lawsuit, Complaint (Federal) (http://us.practicallaw.com/9-507-9951). respond to a complaint, prepare to defend a The plaintiff must include with the complaint: lawsuit and comply with discovery obligations The $400 filing fee. early in the litigation. Two copies of a corporate disclosure statement, if required (FRCP 7.1). A civil cover sheet, if required by the court's local rules. This Note explains the initial steps of a civil lawsuit in US district For more information on filing procedures in federal court, see courts (the trial courts of the federal court system) and the major Practice Note, Commencing a Federal Lawsuit: Filing and Serving the procedural and practical considerations counsel face during a Complaint (http://us.practicallaw.com/9-506-3484). lawsuit's early stages. It covers the steps from filing a complaint through the initial disclosures litigants must make in connection with SERVICE OF PROCESS discovery.
    [Show full text]
  • Demographic, Economic, Geospatial Data for Municipalities of the Central Federal District in Russia (Excluding the City of Moscow and the Moscow Oblast) in 2010-2016
    Population and Economics 3(4): 121–134 DOI 10.3897/popecon.3.e39152 DATA PAPER Demographic, economic, geospatial data for municipalities of the Central Federal District in Russia (excluding the city of Moscow and the Moscow oblast) in 2010-2016 Irina E. Kalabikhina1, Denis N. Mokrensky2, Aleksandr N. Panin3 1 Faculty of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, 119991, Russia 2 Independent researcher 3 Faculty of Geography, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, 119991, Russia Received 10 December 2019 ♦ Accepted 28 December 2019 ♦ Published 30 December 2019 Citation: Kalabikhina IE, Mokrensky DN, Panin AN (2019) Demographic, economic, geospatial data for munic- ipalities of the Central Federal District in Russia (excluding the city of Moscow and the Moscow oblast) in 2010- 2016. Population and Economics 3(4): 121–134. https://doi.org/10.3897/popecon.3.e39152 Keywords Data base, demographic, economic, geospatial data JEL Codes: J1, J3, R23, Y10, Y91 I. Brief description The database contains demographic, economic, geospatial data for 452 municipalities of the 16 administrative units of the Central Federal District (excluding the city of Moscow and the Moscow oblast) for 2010–2016 (Appendix, Table 1; Fig. 1). The sources of data are the municipal-level statistics of Rosstat, Google Maps data and calculated indicators. II. Data resources Data package title: Demographic, economic, geospatial data for municipalities of the Cen- tral Federal District in Russia (excluding the city of Moscow and the Moscow oblast) in 2010–2016. Copyright I.E. Kalabikhina, D.N.Mokrensky, A.N.Panin The article is publicly available and in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution license (CC-BY 4.0) can be used without limits, distributed and reproduced on any medium, pro- vided that the authors and the source are indicated.
    [Show full text]
  • WHICH COURT IS BINDING?1 Binding Vs
    WHICH COURT IS BINDING?1 Binding vs. Persuasive Cases © 2017 The Writing Center at GULC. All rights reserved. You have found the perfect case: the facts are similar to yours and the law is on point. But does the court before which you are practicing (or, in law school, the jurisdiction to which you have been assigned) have to follow the case? Stare decisis is the common law principle that requires courts to follow precedents set by other courts. Under stare decisis, courts are obliged to follow some precedents, but not others. Because of the many layers of our federal system, it can be difficult to figure out which decisions bind a given court. This handout is designed to help you determine which decisions are mandatory and which are persuasive on the court before which you are practicing. Binding versus Persuasive Authority: What’s the Difference? • Binding authority, also referred to as mandatory authority, refers to cases, statutes, or regulations that a court must follow because they bind the court. • Persuasive authority refers to cases, statutes, or regulations that the court may follow but does not have to follow. To get started, ask yourself two questions: 1) Are the legal issues in your case governed by state or federal law? and 2) Which court are you in? Once you know the answers to these questions, you are well on your way to determining whether a decision is mandatory or persuasive. Step 1: Are the Legal Issues in Your Case Governed by Federal or State Law? First, a lawyer needs to know the facts and issues of the case.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Regions As Innovation Gateways: the New Industrialization Development Trajectory
    Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 240 2nd International Scientific Conference on New Industrialization: Global, National, Regional Dimension (SICNI 2018) Coastal regions as innovation gateways: the new industrialization development trajectory Andrey S. Mikhaylov Anna A. Mikhaylova Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, Saint Petersburg Electrotechnical University “LETI” Kaliningrad, Russia Saint-Petersburg, Russia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5155-2628 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6807-6074 Oksana V. Savchina Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), Moscow, Russian Federation https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3568-576X Abstract—Coastal regions are conceived as innovation The coastalization effect that has been present for gateways. Being open to the world the territories adjacent to centuries resulted in hyper-concentration of human activity marine and ocean coasts absorb latest trends in technologies, along the coast. According to [3] the settlements of the coastal techniques, business models, and other advancements. The full zone exceed the global average numbers threefold and are spectrum of innovative solutions are transmitted upcountry after expected to increase. Researchers estimate that before 2040 being assimilated with respect to regional and national over three-quarter of world population will live within 100 km legislation, business culture, available resources, market of a coast [4-6]. Along with population, the coastal zone expectations and other particularities of the territorial features an exponential increase in infrastructure density [7]. community. Exclave position of a region imposes restrictions to The urban sprawl within 200 km wide coastal lowlands is the process of knowledge and innovation diffusion, resulting from both its spatial isolation and differences in properties of the observed worldwide [8; 9].
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Procedure in the Federal District and Federal Territories of Mexico
    University of Miami Law Review Volume 19 Number 2 Article 4 11-1-1964 Criminal Procedure in the Federal District and Federal Territories of Mexico Daniel E. Murray University of Miami School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Daniel E. Murray, Criminal Procedure in the Federal District and Federal Territories of Mexico, 19 U. Miami L. Rev. 251 (1964) Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol19/iss2/4 This Leading Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Miami Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE IN THE FEDERAL DISTRICT AND FEDERAL TERRITORIES OF MEXICO DANIEL E. MURRAY* I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................... 251 II. THE INVESTIGATION STAGE ................................................ 252 A. Constitutional Guarantees ............................................. 252 B. Commencemnt of the Proceedings ...................................... 256 C. Special Rules for the Performance of Steps and the Drawing Up of Records of the Judicial Police ................................................ 258 D . The Instruction Period ............................................... 259 1. PREPARATORY DECLARATION OF THE ACCUSED AND THE
    [Show full text]
  • The U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia, 1801–1863
    National Archives and Records Administration 700 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20408-0001 The U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia, 1801–1863 After the seat of government moved to Washington DC, on December 1, 1800, Congress passed an act for the government of the Federal District on February 27, 1801 (2 Stat. 103). One part of this act created a circuit court for the District of Columbia. This court had the same powers vested in other circuit courts and consisted of one chief judge and two assistant judges, all three of whom were required to be residents of the District of Columbia. The act additionally provided the court with broader jurisdiction than that of the other circuit courts, since state and municipal courts did not exist in the new District. In 1838, the circuit court also served as an appellate court for the district court, the Orphans’ Court, and the Criminal Court. The court held sessions in both Washington and Alexandria counties until July 1846, when Congress returned Alexandria County to the State of Virginia. The circuit court operated until the Supreme Court for the District of Columbia assumed all of its functions in 1863. Records ___M1021, Minutes of the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia, 1801–1863. 6 rolls. DP. The minutes are a chronological record of the activities of the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia, showing dates of sessions; names of presiding judges, marshals, and clerks; and, usually, judgments and orders of the court arising from the litigation of original and appellate, civil, criminal, and admiralty cases before it.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Territorial Federal Judges for the Territory of Wyoming: 1869-1890
    Land & Water Law Review Volume 17 Issue 2 Article 9 1982 History of Territorial Federal Judges for the Territory of Wyoming: 1869-1890 Rebecca Wunder Thomson Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/land_water Recommended Citation Thomson, Rebecca Wunder (1982) "History of Territorial Federal Judges for the Territory of Wyoming: 1869-1890," Land & Water Law Review: Vol. 17 : Iss. 2 , pp. 567 - 619. Available at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/land_water/vol17/iss2/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Land & Water Law Review by an authorized editor of Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. Thomson: History of Territorial Federal Judges for the Territory of Wyomin University of Wyoming College of Law LAND AND WATER LAW REVIEW VOLUME XVII 1982 NUMBER 2 A similar version of this article appeared in the Fall, 1981 (Volume 53, Number 2) edition of the Annals of Wyoming. This article is the first half of the author's work on the Federal bench in Wyoming, the remainder of the piece being entitled "United States District Judges for the District of Wyoming: 1890-1980." Immediately following the text of this article is a listing of the Territorial Federal Judges for the Territory of Wyoming during the years 1869-1890 (Appendix I), and a listing of the periods of service of the Justices of the Territorial Supreme Court of Wyoming (Appendix i1). HISTORY OF TERRITORIAL FEDERAL JUDGES FOR THE TERRITORY OF WYOMING: 1869-1890 Rebecca Wunder Thomson* Like all courts, the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal and Local Jurisdiction in the District of Columbia
    Notes Federal and Local Jurisdiction in the District of Columbia The 1982 trial of John Hinckley for the attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan brought to the public's attention a unique fea- ture of the criminal justice system in the District of Columbia. Although federal and state charges never are joined together for trial, federal and D.C. Code charges may be joined in one indictment under section 11- 502(3) of the D.C. Code,' and tried before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.' In the Hinckley case, the federal prosecutor used section 11-502(3) to join three federal and ten D.C. Code charges. This joinder required the district court to determine whether to use both federal and D.C. Code evidentiary standards during the trial, or only one standard. The court ruled that only federal standards would be used,' and therefore placed the 1. Under D.C. CODE ANN. § 11-502(3) (1981), the United States District Court has jurisdiction over "[any offense under any law applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia which offense is joined in the same information or indictment with any Federal offense." A similar but more limited jurisdictional statute is found at D.C. CODE ANN. § 23-311(b) (1981): Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment or information as provided in subsection (a) [offenses charged are of similar character or based on same transaction] even though one or more is in violation of the laws of the United States and another is in violation of the laws applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia and may be prosecuted as pro- vided in Section 11-502(3).
    [Show full text]
  • The Concepts of Enclave and Exclave and Their Use
    www.ssoar.info The concepts of enclave and exclave and their use in the political and geographical characteristic of the Kaliningrad region Rozhkov-Yuryevsky, Yuri Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Rozhkov-Yuryevsky, Y. (2013). The concepts of enclave and exclave and their use in the political and geographical characteristic of the Kaliningrad region. Baltic Region, 2, 113-123. https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2013-2-11 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Free Digital Peer Publishing Licence This document is made available under a Free Digital Peer zur Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den DiPP-Lizenzen Publishing Licence. For more Information see: finden Sie hier: http://www.dipp.nrw.de/lizenzen/dppl/service/dppl/ http://www.dipp.nrw.de/lizenzen/dppl/service/dppl/ Diese Version ist zitierbar unter / This version is citable under: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-351079 RESEARCH REPORTS This article focuses on the genesis of THE CONCEPTS and correlation between the related con- OF ENCLAVE cepts of enclave and exclave and the scope of their use in different sciences, fields of AND EXCLAVE knowledge, and everyday speech. The au- thor examines the circumstances of their AND THEIR USE emergence in the reference and professional IN THE POLITICAL literature in the Russian language. Special attention is paid to the typology of the AND GEOGRAPHICAL world’s enclave territories as objects of po- CHARACTERISTIC litical geography; at the same time, their new categories and divisions (international OF THE KALININGRAD enclave, overseas exclaves, internal en- claves of different levels) are extended and REGION introduced.
    [Show full text]
  • Process of Border-Making and Border-Breaking: the Case of Kaliningrad
    Working Papers Series in EU Border Conflicts Studies PROCESS OF BORDER-MAKING AND BORDER-BREAKING: THE CASE OF KALININGRAD Pertti Joenniemi and Andrey Makarychev Department of European Studies Danish Institute for International Studies No. 7 March 2004 1. Introduction: EU-Russia Borders in a Comparative Perspective Due to the Union’s enlargement of the mid-1990s, the European Union and Russia gained with the Finnish EU-membership a common border. They became neighbors in a rather concrete sense, and overall, the experiences have in that context been basically positive. The border is not a contested one (on the level of official policies) and it has also functioned by and large smoothly as to the rules of passage, visa and customs regulations as well as the degree of openness. However, this is not to say that questions as to borders and bordering stand out as wholly unproblematic in the sphere of the Russia-EU relationship. In fact, they do not. There are some questions regarding border-drawing still on the agenda, although the underpinning reasons tend to be political in nature rather than relate directly to borders as such and there are disputes that have their background in past history and feelings of wrong- doing, but above all the remaining issues pertain to the broader conceptual departures that the parties apply in designing and implementing their border policies. As to border-drawing, Estonia and Latvia initially regarded the borders suggested in the early 1990s as illegal. They wanted to go back to the borders of the inter-war period whereas Russia, for its part, opted for the then existing borders, among other reasons because the population in the contested areas was almost without exception Russian-speaking.
    [Show full text]
  • CREATING the FEDERAL JUDICIAL SYSTEM
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. CREATING the FEDERAL JUDICIAL SYSTEM ()c::) FEDERAL JUDICIAL CENTER ~ t--- ~ ~.... 1789-BICENTENNIAL OF THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY-1989 THE FEDERAL JUDICIAL CENTER Board The Chief Justice of the United States, Chairman Judge J. Clifford Wallace Chief Judge William C O'Kelley United States Court oj Appeals Jor the Ninth Circuit United States District Court, Northern District oj GeOTfJia Judge Monroe G. McKay Judge David D. Dowd, Jr. Uflfted States Court oj Appeals Jor the Tenth Circuit United States District Court, Northern District oj Ohio Judge Jose A. Cabranes Judge Robert E. Ginsberg United States District Court, District oj Connecticut United States Bankruptcy Court, Northern District oj Illinois L. Ralph Mecham Director oj the Administrative OJJice oj the U.s. Courts Director .Judge John C Godbold Deputy Director Charles W. Nihan Division Directors William B. Eldridge, Research Daniel L. Skoler, Continuing Education & Training Richard D. Fennell, Innovations & Systems Development Russell R. Wheeler, Spedal Educational Services Alice L. O'Donnell, Inter-Judicial Affairs & InJormation Services 1520 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C 20005 Telephone (202) 633-6011 ~ 102728 u.s. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this 0 : 5 Igl:tcd material has been granted by Public Domain Federal- JuCiicial Center to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS).
    [Show full text]