DOCSLIB.ORG

74456NCJRS.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
74456NCJRS.Pdf If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. -~~ -... ~--~~ -, '-J lJ H I '. Ii III' u \ IT , f , . , I . - ., .. - ~J" ~ '-~, '. , .. ';; ~ < ~ , COURT REFORM COURT REFORM IN SEVEN IN STATES SEVEN ST A TES UTAH ': FLORIDA , NEW YORK Lee Powell, Editor "i ! KENTUCKY ", ,I WISCONSIN ,:~ctJ "WASHINGTON j.3U< .....~~ .... ,,'" ~ i CONNECTICUT ; NCJRS ~I~\ ,:1-3-1 Publication R0054 .' .'" 2 111m 1980 I c. ., , ::1-' J \ I I , ~CQUDSITIC:~"';;;i I ,f •• f I ! - . ! ",' .'" _ '.4 __~·'" -, . " T -, /'. <.' • v )1 ,(, :! \ ~ fl I With the exception of the Florida article, these articles are products of the Implementation of Standards of Judicial Administration (lSJA) Project. This project is an effort of the American Bar Association t .Judicial Administration Division with staff support provided by the II (: ·6 National Center for State Courts. ll~'V [,l ~ I: II 1:Ii I \iIi Copyright ©1980 l' American Bar Association I' J' I 74456 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 copyrighted material in mi­ crofiche only has been granted by American Bar Association This series has been prepared with support from Grant No. 78-DF­ I AX-0149 and Grant No. 79-DF-AX-0219 awarded by the Law En­ I. f forcement Assistance Administration, United States Department of to the National Criminal Justice Referenpe Service (NCJRS). I Justice. Points of view or opinions stated in these reports are those of the Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permis­ authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the sion of the copyright owner. United States Department of Justice. IL .' Printed in the United States of America J ~---- - -~- -,,- 1 /1 '01'6 II Committee Members II II Chairman Honorable James J. Richards, Chief Judge II i Superior Court of Lake County, Indiana !j : I Vice-Chairman Richard J. Bartlett, Dean, Albany Law Schoo! !~- Union University, Albany, New York I I dI' Honorable Cameron M. Batjer, Justice if )i Supreme Court of Nevada, Carson City, Nevada II Honorable Jean S. Cooper II HUD Board of Contract Appeals, Washington, DC ! I Honorable James H. Johnston, Judge I',J Hennepin County Municipal Court, Minneapolis, II II Minnesota I: if R. Stanley Lowe, Esquire Casper, Wyoming IIp 11I' Alice L. O'Donnell, Esquire Ii Federal Judic,ial Center, Washington, DC d Honorable Arthur J. Simpson, Jr., Judge II Administrative Office of the Courts, Trenton, New Ii Jersey IIr! • I U Honorable Frederick Woleslagel, Judge i i I! 20th District Court of Kansas, Lyons, Kansas i j U Project Director rl I ' Orm W. Ketcham i \ } i 1 .~ Deputy Project Director I i Victoria S. Cashman I i r!! ~ i ! I i - 0 ! '= J ' ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I, i - I I \I" I The Implementation of Standards of Judicial Administration Project ! r,) staff members would like to recognize and thank Douglas C. Dodge, Mae Kuykendall, Ernest S. Zavodnyik, and the Publications Department D of the National Center for State Courts for their valuable contributions to the implementation case history series. iii -,-- l TABLE OF CONTENTS Board of Directors William S. Richardson, Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Hawaii, President Theodore R. Newman, Jr., Chief Judge, District of Columbia Court of Appeals, Vice-President Robert C. Broomfield, Presiding Judge, Superior Court of Maricopa Introduction ........................................ v County, Arizona Lawrence H. Cooke, Chief Judge, Court of Appeals of New York Preface ............................................. vii Mercedes F. Deiz, Judge, Circuit Court of Oregon Roland J. Faricy, Judge, Ramsey County Municipal Court, St. Paul, l Imp~ent.tion o~ Court Reform in Kentncky Minnesota , WIllIam E. DavIs ................................... Joe R. Greenhill, Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Texas 1 ,Yl./S? I Lawrence W. I' Anson, Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Virginia oMt')utional Jurisdiction of the Florida Supreme Court: Wilfred W. Nuernberger, Judge, Separate Juvenile Court of Lancaster 1980 Reform County, Nebraska ~. Arthur J. England, Jr. , Kaliste J. Saloom, Jr., Judge, City Court of Lafayette, Louisiana Eleanor Mitchell Hunter Joseph R. Weisberger, Justice, Supreme Court of Rhode Island Richard C. Williams, Jr ............ ! •••••••••••••••••• 4114~JS8 Robert A. Wenke, Judge, Superior Court, Los Angeles, California r-rl'.. \ stru"ttural Change and Its Implementation in the Connecticut ;i Court System Council of State Court Reprt!sentatives Anthony B. Fisser .................................. Arthur J. England, Jr., Chief Justice, Slllpreme Court of Florida, ",""'--' v'\ Chairman \ Judicial Reform in Wisconsin: Some More Lessons for Reformers B. Don Barnes, Justice, Supreme Court of Oklahoma, Vice-Chairman .... Robert J. Martineau ................' ......... , ...... r'~ \ C~ Reform: The New York Experience \' fJ L.. Frederick Miller ............................. , ...... 105 7"1 / (,£ t Staff r-- lfeadquarters Office, Williamsburg, Virginia VrnPlementation Strategies to Obtain a New Court System in Utah Edward B. McConnell, Director L Thornley K. Swan .................................. Keith L. Bumsted, Deputy Director for Administration Geoffrey W. Peters, Deputy Director for Programs o r ~hington State Court Reform .Tohn M. Greacen, Deputy Director Designate for Programs Phillip B. Winberry ................................. Lynn A. Jensen, Associate Director for Programs Lynford E. Kautz, Associate Director for Development and Public Affairs Joel Zimmerman, Associate Director for Research and Development Regional Offices Francis L. Bremson, Director, North Central, St. Paul, Minnesota Samuel D. Conti, Director, Northeastern, North Andover, .. ' Massachusetts o James R. James, Director, Southern, Atlanta, Georgia Lynn A. Jensen, Acting Director, Mid-Atlantic, Williamsburg, Virginia Larry L. Sipes, Director, Western, San Francisco, California iv v -r' --.--- INTRODUCTION PREFACE , ! The National Center.for State Courts is pleased to co.operate with the American Bar Association's Committee on In:ple~entatlO~ of Standards Beginning in 1975, the American Bar Association Committee on of Judicial Administration (ISJA) in the publIcatIon of thIS book, Court Implementation of Standards of Judicial Administration has conducted Reform in Seven States. .... a comprehensive project to urge consideration of the ABA Standards of The National Center is a private, nonprofIt organIzatIon dedIcated to judicial Administration, the first of which, Court Organization, was adopted in 1974, followed by Trial Courts in 1976 and Appellate Courts the improvement of justice at the state and local leve.ls, and. to. t~e in 1977. modernization of court operations. It acts as a focal POInt for JU~ICIal ,0 reform. By providing staff to the ISJA Project Com~ittee, the NatIon~1 Many states are changing to unified trial courts, consolidated ad­ Center serves as a catalyst for setting and implem~n.tmg standar~s of_faIr ministrative structure, judicial merit selection, judicial discipline and expeditious judicial administration. Such.a JOInt effort to Implove commissions, and unified state budgeting. The progress in reforming and the effectiveness of America's judicial system IS an ex~ell~nt example of improving the court systems in some states has led to increased attention one way in which the National Center seeks to acco~phsh It~ mandate. to the problems in others. The public, the legislatures, and the executive The National Center hopes that this volume s narratI~e of. co~rt branches of government are increasingly receptive to fundamental reform strategies used in seven states will assist other states In aChIeVIng reorganization of the state judicial systems, similar successes. The first project commissioned by the Committee was the Model .~) , Judicial Article adopted in 1978. This was followed by the preparation of Edward B. McConnell, Director state profiles for all 50 states, comparing their present Court systems with National Center for State Courts the Standards. During the third phase of the project, the Committee commissioned six descriptions of Standards implementation efforts in six states: Connecticut, Kentucky, New York, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin. The Florida article, which describes recent court reform activity in that state, is a welcome addition to the series. Each article is written by a leading participant in a state reform effort. The papers highlight the reasons particular reforms were chosen, how the goals were modified over time, and the specific reform methods undertaken. The articles describe both successful and unsuccessful reform attempts. Writings on the state of the art of Court unification and the general theory of implementing change have existed for some time. These histories, written from an insider's view, will supplement Court reform literature. James J. Richards, Chairman Implementation of Standards of Judicial Admihistration Project Committee vi vii - __ ~----- -~, ...o--~-- __- ..----------~---~--.------~----.------.~"--~~-- 74457 r KENTUCKY IMPLEMENTATION OF COURT REFORM IN KENTUCKY William E. Davis Laws and Institutions must change to keep pace with the progress of the human mind. -Thomas Jefferson Court reform has been the largest change in Kentucky's
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Negroes Are Different in Dixie: the Press, Perception, and Negro League Baseball in the Jim Crow South, 1932 by Thomas Aiello Research Essay ______
    NEGROES ARE DIFFERENT IN DIXIE: THE PRESS, PERCEPTION, AND NEGRO LEAGUE BASEBALL IN THE JIM CROW SOUTH, 1932 BY THOMAS AIELLO RESEARCH ESSAY ______________________________________________ “Only in a Negro newspaper can a complete coverage of ALL news effecting or involving Negroes be found,” argued a Southern Newspaper Syndicate advertisement. “The good that Negroes do is published in addition to the bad, for only by printing everything fit to read can a correct impression of the Negroes in any community be found.”1 Another argued that, “When it comes to Negro newspapers you can’t measure Birmingham or Atlanta or Memphis Negroes by a New York or Chicago Negro yardstick.” In a brief section titled “Negroes Are Different in Dixie,” the Syndicate’s evaluation of the Southern and Northern black newspaper readers was telling: Northern Negroes may ordain it indecent to read a Negro newspaper more than once a week—but the Southern Negro is more consolidated. Necessity has occasioned this condition. Most Southern white newspapers exclude Negro items except where they are infamous or of a marked ridiculous trend… While his northern brother is busily engaged in ‘getting white’ and ruining racial consciousness, the Southerner has become more closely knit.2 The advertisement was designed to announce and justify the Atlanta World’s reformulation as the Atlanta Daily World, making it the first African-American daily. This fact alone probably explains the advertisement’s “indecent” comment, but its “necessity” argument seems far more legitimate.3 For example, the 1932 Monroe Morning World, a white daily from Monroe, Louisiana, provided coverage of the black community related almost entirely to crime and church meetings.
    [Show full text]
  • No Justice in Utah's Justice Courts: Constitutional Issues, Systemic Problems, and the Failure to Protect Defendants in Utah's Infamous Local Courts Samuel P
    Utah OnLaw: The Utah Law Review Online Supplement Volume 2012 Article 2 2012 No Justice in Utah's Justice Courts: Constitutional Issues, Systemic Problems, and the Failure to Protect Defendants in Utah's Infamous Local Courts Samuel P. Newton Teresa L. Welch Neal G. Hamilton Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.law.utah.edu/onlaw Part of the Courts Commons, Judges Commons, and the Jurisprudence Commons Recommended Citation Newton, Samuel P.; Welch, Teresa L.; and Hamilton, Neal G. (2012) "No Justice in Utah's Justice Courts: Constitutional Issues, Systemic Problems, and the Failure to Protect Defendants in Utah's Infamous Local Courts," Utah OnLaw: The Utah Law Review Online Supplement: Vol. 2012 , Article 2. Available at: https://dc.law.utah.edu/onlaw/vol2012/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Utah Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Utah OnLaw: The tU ah Law Review Online Supplement by an authorized editor of Utah Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NO JUSTICE IN UTAH’S JUSTICE COURTS: CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES, SYSTEMIC PROBLEMS, AND THE FAILURE TO PROTECT † DEFENDANTS IN UTAH’S INFAMOUS LOCAL COURTS Samuel P. Newton,* Teresa L. Welch,** & Neal G. Hamilton*** [T]here’ll be no Justice of the Peace for you; just a big piece of justice.1 INTRODUCTION Justice courts2 could be called the most loved and hated court in the judicial system. The justices of the peace who preside over the courts are equally polarizing figures. The courts have been called “a powerful, multifaceted, local legal institution”3 which “helped design and weave together the social, economic, and political fabric”4 of American society.
    [Show full text]
  • Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ______PETITION for a WRIT of CERTIORARI ______SCOTT L
    No. ______ In the Supreme Court of the United States __________________ GIANINNA GALLARDO, AN INCAPACITATED PERSON, BY AND THROUGH HER PARENTS AND CO-GUARDIANS PILAR VASSALLO AND WALTER GALLARDO, Petitioner, v. SIMONE MARSTILLER, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE FLORIDA AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, Respondent. __________________ On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit __________________ PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI __________________ SCOTT L. NELSON BRYAN S. GOWDY PUBLIC CITIZEN LITIGATION Counsel of Record GROUP MEREDITH A. ROSS 1600 20th Street NW CREED & GOWDY, P.A. Washington, DC 20009 865 May Street (202) 588-1000 Jacksonville, FL 32204 (904) 350-0075 FLOYD FAGLIE [email protected] STAUNTON & FAGLIE, PL 189 E. Walnut Street Monticello, FL 32344 (850) 997-6300 Counsel for Petitioner March 9, 2021 Becker Gallagher · Cincinnati, OH · Washington, D.C. · 800.890.5001 i QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the federal Medicaid Act provides for a state Medicaid program to recover reimbursement for Medicaid’s payment of a beneficiary’s past medical expenses by taking funds from the portion of the beneficiary’s tort recovery that compensates for future medical expenses. ii PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS Petitioner Gianinna Gallardo, an incapacitated person, by and through her parents and co- Guardians Pilar Vassallo and Walter Gallardo, was the plaintiff-appellee below. Respondent Simone Marstiller is, in her official capacity, the current Secretary of the Florida Agency for Healthcare Administration. Her predecessors (Mary Mayhew, Justin Senior, and Elizabeth Dudek) were—during their respective tenures and in their official capacities as Secretaries of the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration—previously named as the defendant-appellant below.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah S Wyoming SColoradoSTexas
    Fall 2016 Dewhirst DolvenLLC Attorneys at Law Legal Update Utah s Wyoming sColoradosTexas Plaintiffs appealed, seeking a trial de novo Utah at the district court. At trial, Defendant in brief stressed the multiple inconsistencies in Plaintiffs’ medical records as to how the DEWHIRST & DOLVEN accident occurred and as to the alleged UTAH OBTAINS THREE DEFENSE injuries. Upon bench trial, the district court • The Utah Supreme Court VERDICTS IN A TRIAL DE judge also held that the alleged injuries did judicially adopted a new cause of NOVO not match the vehicle’s minor scrape mark. action for filial consortium for Salt Lake City County: Dewhirst & As such, the judge rendered “no cause of losses sustained from a Dolven attorney Kyle Shoop obtained action” as to all three of the Plaintiffs’ minor-child’s serious injury. In three defense verdicts upon a trial de actions. adopting the cause of action, the novo to the bench. This matter involved Damian v. Nesbit, Court held that the same statutory alleged personal injuries from three Case No. 168900005, requirements for a spousal loss of Plaintiffs, who were brothers, after an Salt Lake County, Utah. consortium claim must be met. alleged impact between Plaintiffs’ .....................................Page 2 vehicle and a semi tractor-trailer driven by Defendant Ryan Nesbit. COLORADO In a construction defect case, the Plaintiffs initially filed their actions • against Defendant Nesbit in small claims Colorado Court of Appeals court. They alleged that the rear interpreted when “substantial driver-side of Defendant’s trailer completion” of a contractor’s impacted their vehicle as the truck made In This Issue work occurs under the builder’s a right turn onto northbound Bangerter statute of repose.
    [Show full text]
  • In the District Court of Appeal First District of Florida
    Filing # 113063503 E-Filed 09/09/2020 11:34:29 AM IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT OF FLORIDA DELANEY REYNOLDS, et al. Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Case No. 1D20-2036 L.T. Case No. 18-CA-00819 THE STATE OF FLORIDA; RON DESANTIS, in his official capacity as Governor of the State of Florida, et al. Defendants/Appellees. __________________________________________________________________ ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA __________________________________________________________________ INITIAL BRIEF OF PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS __________________________________________________________________ GUY M. BURNS, FBN 0160901 MITCHELL A. CHESTER, FBN 288136 Johnson Pope Boker Ruppel & Law Office of Mitchell A. Chester, P.A. Burns, LLP 150 S. Pine Island Road, Ste. 300 401 East Jackson Street, Suite 3100 Plantation, Florida 33324 RECEIVED, 09/09/2020 11:35:30 AM, Clerk, First District Court of Appeal Tampa, Florida 33602 Ph: (954) 759-9960 Ph: (813) 225-2500 Fx: (954) 759-9930 Fx: (813) 223-7118 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for Appellants ERIN L. DEADY, FBN 0367310 F. WALLACE POPE, JR., FBN 124449 Erin L. Deady, P.A. Johnson Pope Bokor Ruppel & 54 ½ SE 6th Avenue Burns, LLP Delray Beach, FL 33483 911 Chestnut Street Ph: (954) 593-5102 Clearwater, Florida 33756 [email protected] Ph: (727) 461-1818 Fx: (727) 441-8167 [email protected] DEB SWIM, FBN 336025 JANE WEST, FBN 159417 Deb Swim, PLLC Jane West Law, P.L. 1323 Diamond Street 24 Cathedral Place, Ste. 504 Tallahassee, FL 32301 St. Augustine, FL 32084 Ph: (850) 656-0448 Ph: (904) 471-0505 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] MATTHEW D.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Respondent's Brief NO
    Best Respondent's Brief NO. 03-0052 In The United States Court Of Appeals For The Fourteenth Circuit Spring Term 2003 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE, V. ELIZABETH MONROE, APPELLANT. On appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Glidden BRIEF FOR APPELLEE Team #6 Charlotte LeClercq Kory A. Atkinson Northern Illinois University College of Law Swen Parson Hall DeKalb, IL 60115 ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED 376 NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 23 QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Whether federal agents violated the Fourth Amendment right of the appellant to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures when agents, pursuant to a valid premises search warrant, searched a purse defendant had voluntarily placed on a chair while she was a guest on the premises? 2. Whether appellant is subject to criminal liability under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) for using or carrying a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking offense when she traded twenty kilograms of cocaine for five AK-47 assault rifles in furtherance of a drug distribution conspiracy? 2003] BEST RESPONDENT'S BRIEF OPINIONS BELOW The order and judgment of the District Court for the District of Glidden are unreported and are contained in the Transcript of the Record (R. at 20-22; R. at 33) and in the Appendix (C-I; E-1).* STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION A formal statement of jurisdiction has been omitted in accordance with the rule of the Northern Illinois University College of Law Second Year Moot Court Competition. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT The United States District Court for the District of Glidden convicted the defendant, Elizabeth Monroe, of violating 18 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Pattern Criminal Jury Instructions for the District Courts of the First Circuit)
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE 2019 REVISIONS TO PATTERN CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE DISTRICT COURTS OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT DISTRICT OF MAINE INTERNET SITE EDITION Updated 6/24/19 by Chief District Judge Nancy Torresen PATTERN CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT Preface to 1998 Edition Citations to Other Pattern Instructions How to Use the Pattern Instructions Part 1—Preliminary Instructions 1.01 Duties of the Jury 1.02 Nature of Indictment; Presumption of Innocence 1.03 Previous Trial 1.04 Preliminary Statement of Elements of Crime 1.05 Evidence; Objections; Rulings; Bench Conferences 1.06 Credibility of Witnesses 1.07 Conduct of the Jury 1.08 Notetaking 1.09 Outline of the Trial Part 2—Instructions Concerning Certain Matters of Evidence 2.01 Stipulations 2.02 Judicial Notice 2.03 Impeachment by Prior Inconsistent Statement 2.04 Impeachment of Witness Testimony by Prior Conviction 2.05 Impeachment of Defendant's Testimony by Prior Conviction 2.06 Evidence of Defendant's Prior Similar Acts 2.07 Weighing the Testimony of an Expert Witness 2.08 Caution as to Cooperating Witness/Accomplice/Paid Informant 2.09 Use of Tapes and Transcripts 2.10 Flight After Accusation/Consciousness of Guilt 2.11 Statements by Defendant 2.12 Missing Witness 2.13 Spoliation 2.14 Witness (Not the Defendant) Who Takes the Fifth Amendment 2.15 Definition of “Knowingly” 2.16 “Willful Blindness” As a Way of Satisfying “Knowingly” 2.17 Definition of “Willfully” 2.18 Taking a View 2.19 Character Evidence 2.20 Testimony by Defendant
    [Show full text]
  • Jjcl I Nøw1æ ~(M
    'ê~"C7. .. II ii 'I 'i ~ 'I \ II ll I II II ~ II o II II II ii II ll ..JJCl i _nøW1æ ~(m iI II .. ~ ii .e n g II II := Justice A.H. Ellett 7 Working Through Utah's Agency Disclosure Law 11 Amending Utah's Immunity Statute 14 . UTAH BAR JOURAL Published by Vol. 1, NO.2 October, 1988 The Utah State Bar 645 South 200 East Salt Lae City, Utah 84111 Telephone (801) 531-9077 President Kent M. Kasting Question of the Month 4 President-Elect Hans Q. Chamberlain President's Message 6 Executive Director Justice A.H. Ellett 7 Stephen F. Hutchinson By Justice J. Allen Crockett, Retired Board of Bar Commissioners / H. James Clegg Working Through Utah's Agency Disclosure Law 11 James Z. Davis By David W. Johnson, Esq. Randy L. Dryer Hon. Pamela T. Greenwoo Stewar M. Hanson Jr, Amending Utah's Immunity Statute 14 James R. Holbrook By David J. Schwendiman and Jackson B. Howard Hon. Gordon J. Low Creighton C. Horton II, Assistant Attorney General Anne M. Stirba Exoffcio Members State Bar News 16 Bruce C. Hafen Norman S. Johnson Reed L. Marineau Case Summaries 23 Edward D. Spurgeon By Wiliam D. Holyoak and Clark R. Nielsen Young Lawyers Section President Jerr D. Fenn Jr. Legislative Report 27-. Bar Journal Committee CLE Calendar 29 and Editorial Board Editor Calvin E. Thorp Classified Ads 30 Assiate Editors Randall L. Romrell David B. Enckson C" Letters Editor Nann Novinski-Durando Articles Editors Leland S. McCullough Jr. Glen W. Roberts Views from the Bench Cover: Photograph of Utah Supreme Court Justice Albert H.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court Task Force to Examine Limited Legal Licensing ______
    ______________ Supreme Court Task Force to Examine Limited Legal Licensing __________________________________ ______________ ______________ Report and Recommendations November 18, 2015 __________________________________ ______________ The mission of the Utah judiciary is to provide the people an open, fair, efficient, and independent system for the advancement of justice under the law. SUPREME COURT TASK FORCE TO EXAMINE LIMITED LEGAL LICENSING (1) Introduction and summary ............................................................. 5 (a) Introduction ................................................................................. 5 (b) Task force charge .......................................................................... 7 (c) Summary of recommendations .................................................... 8 (2) The practice of law in Utah ........................................................ 10 (a) Authority of the supreme court to govern the practice of law ... 10 (b) Supreme court rules .................................................................... 11 (3) Program design principles ......................................................... 14 (4) Practice areas of greatest demand ............................................. 15 (5) Procedural areas of paraprofessional competence .................... 16 (a) How do people get advice about remedies to their “civil justice situations”? ............................................................................................... 16 (b) How do people obtain and prepare forms?
    [Show full text]
  • The 2021-2022 Guide to State Court Judicial Clerkship Procedures
    The 2021-2022 Guide to State Court Judicial Clerkship Procedures The Vermont Public Interest Action Project Office of Career Services Vermont Law School Copyright © 2021 Vermont Law School Acknowledgement The 2021-2022 Guide to State Court Judicial Clerkship Procedures represents the contributions of several individuals and we would like to take this opportunity to thank them for their ideas and energy. We would like to acknowledge and thank the state court administrators, clerks, and other personnel for continuing to provide the information necessary to compile this volume. Likewise, the assistance of career services offices in several jurisdictions is also very much appreciated. Lastly, thank you to Elijah Gleason in our office for gathering and updating the information in this year’s Guide. Quite simply, the 2021-2022 Guide exists because of their efforts, and we are very appreciative of their work on this project. We have made every effort to verify the information that is contained herein, but judges and courts can, and do, alter application deadlines and materials. As a result, if you have any questions about the information listed, please confirm it directly with the individual court involved. It is likely that additional changes will occur in the coming months, which we will monitor and update in the Guide accordingly. We believe The 2021-2022 Guide represents a necessary tool for both career services professionals and law students considering judicial clerkships. We hope that it will prove useful and encourage other efforts to share information of use to all of us in the law school career services community.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. House Report 32 for H.R. 4221 (Feb 1959)
    86TH CONoRESS L HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT 1st Session No. 32 HAWAII STATEHOOD FEBRUARY 11, 1959.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. AsPINALL, from the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H.R. 4221] The Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 4221) to provide for the admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. The purpose of H.R. 4221, introduced by Representative O'Brien of New York, is to provide for the admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union. This bill and its two companions-H.R. 4183 by Delegate Burns and H.R. 4228 by Representative Saylor-were introduced following the committee's consideration of 20 earlier 86th Congress bills and include all amendments adopted in connection therewith. These 20 bills are as follows: H.R. 50, introduced by Delegate Burns; H.R. 324, introduced by Representative Barrett; H.R. 801, introduced by Representative Holland; H.R. 888, introduced by Representative O'Brien of New York; H.R. 954, introduced by Representative Saylor; H.R. 959, introduced by Representative Sisk; H.R. 1106, introduced by Representative Berry; H.R. 1800, introduced by Repre- sentative Dent; H.R. 1833, introduced by Representative Libonati; H.R. 1917, introduced by Representative Green of Oregon; H.R. 1918, introduced by Representative Holt; H.R. 2004, introduced by Representative Younger; .H.R.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fifth Circuit Four: the Unheralded Judges Who Helped to Break Legal Barriers in the Deep South Max Grinstein Junior Divisio
    The Fifth Circuit Four: The Unheralded Judges Who Helped to Break Legal Barriers in the Deep South Max Grinstein Junior Division Historical Paper Length: 2,500 Words 1 “For thus saith the Lord God, how much more when I send my four sore judgments upon Jerusalem, the sword, and the famine, and the noisome beast, and the pestilence, to cut off from it man and beast.”1 In the Bible, the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse are said to usher in the end of the world. That is why, in 1964, Judge Ben Cameron gave four of his fellow judges on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit the derisive nickname “the Fifth Circuit Four” – because they were ending the segregationist world of the Deep South.2 The conventional view of the civil rights struggle is that the Southern white power structure consistently opposed integration.3 While largely true, one of the most powerful institutions in the South, the Fifth Circuit, helped to break civil rights barriers by enforcing the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, something that other Southern courts were reluctant to do.4 Despite personal and professional backlash, Judges John Minor Wisdom, Elbert Tuttle, Richard Rives, and John Brown played a significant but often overlooked role in integrating the South.5 Background on the Fifth Circuit The federal court system, in which judges are appointed for life, consists of three levels.6 At the bottom are the district courts, where cases are originally heard by a single trial judge. At 1 Ezekiel 14:21 (King James Version).
    [Show full text]