Appellate Court Delay - Structural Responses to the Problems of Volume and Delay

• NCJ Number: 80390
• Author(s): J A Martin; E A Prescott
• Date Published: 1981
• Length: 180 pages
• Grant Number(s): 78-DF-AX-0021; 79-DF-AX-0082
• Sponsoring Agency: US Dept of Justice; Charles E Culpeper Foundation
• Corporate Author: National Ctr for State Courts
• Sale Source: National Ctr for State Courts; National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Limited number of copies available from the National Center for State Courts.

Annotation

Ten appellate courts from various States, handling differing caseloads and with different structures and procedures, were studied to determine the major characteristics of court environments, the effect of environment on court delay and processing times, and the relationship of delay to case volume, court organization, and court structure.

Abstract

Study data were collected from library research, files on approximately 5,900 cases from 1975-76, and site visits to the 10 courts. The sites included courts of last resort in Nebraska, Montana, and Virginia; intermediate appellate courts with statewide jurisdiction in Oregon, New Jersey, Colorado, and Indiana; and intermediate appellate courts with county or regional jurisdiction in Florida, Ohio, and Illinois. Processing times in the sample courts differed dramatically, whether measured by average number of days in the full sample or time distributions by quartiles. Breaking down each court's time distribution by percentage of completed cases in a series of 6-month intervals also highlighted the differences. The time elapsed during the first-phase of processing, from lower court judgment to submission, ranged from 153 days in the Oregon Court of Appeals to 383 days in the Illinois Appellate Court, First District. The differences in the second phase, elapsed time between 'at issue' (i.e., when all materials relevant to a case have been filed) and oral argument, were even greater, with this phase taking up to 10 times longer in some courts. The decisionmaking phase was characterized by less dramatic differences, but the final stage, between decision announcement and mandate issuance, ranged from 6 to 130 days. Volume of cases did not appear to be an overriding reason for delay differences, and the amount of backlog in a given court was not totally a function of volume, but rather of the interplay of volume, decisionmaking efficiency, and managerial style. Differences in the configurations of the caseloads had little effect on processing time, but the average number of extensions per case, brief and opinion lengths, and processing time and delay were related. Standards specifying the amount of time to complete the initial steps in the appellate process seemed to be significant in reducing delay, as were policies restricting authority for granting extensions and formal mechanisms for conflict resolution. Finally, courts that used summary disposition techniques generally had shorter decision time averages. Appendixes include study data and instruments and three papers on court delay issues.