NCJ Number
50391
Date Published
1978
Length
29 pages
Annotation
A LEGAL EXPERIMENT CONDUCTED BETWEEN 1974 AND 1977 AT THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS TESTED WHETHER AND TO WHAT EXTENT PREAPPEAL CONFERENCES COULD IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF APPEALS AND EXPEDITE THE APPELLATE PROCESS.
Abstract
AFTER REVIEWING MANY APPROACHES, IT WAS DECIDED THAT THE EVALUATION SHOULD BE CONDUCTED EXPERIMENTALLY, I.E., THAT CASES MEETING CIVIL APPEALS MANAGEMENT PLAN (CAMP) PROCEDURES BE ASSIGNED TO EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS BY A RANDOM PROCESS. THE USE OF A SCHEDULING ORDER BACKED BY A THREAT OF DISMISSAL IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT, WAS EMPLOYED TO NOTIFY ATTORNEYS OF DEADLINES IN THE PROCESSING OF THEIR APPEALS. IN ADDITION, RULE 33 PREARGUMENT CONFERENCES WERE USED TO DISCUSS SETTLEMENT, WITHDRAWAL, OR OTHER MATTERS THAT MIGHT IMPROVE THE APPEAL. THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP WOULD RECEIVE BOTH SCHEDULING ORDERS AND RULE 33 CONFERENCES UNDER THE AUSPICES OF A SENIOR STAFF ATTORNEY, WHILE THE CONTROL GROUP WOULD RECEIVE NEITHER. THE ETHICAL ISSUE OF WHETHER APPELLATE PROCEDURES CAN BE DENIED TO ANYONE DEEMED ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE THEM WAS CONFRONTED AND RESOLVED BY INFORMING ATTORNEYS IN THE CONTROL CASES THAT THEIR CLIENTS WERE TO BE DENIED SCHEDULING ORDERS AND CONFERENCES. RESULTS DEMONSTRATED THAT SCHEDULING ORDERS AND RULE 33 CONFERENCES DID NOT SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE THE PROPORTION OF CASES DECIDED, DID AFFECT THE QUALITY OF APPEALS BUT ONLY IN A TRIVIAL WAY, AND DID NOT SIGNIFICANTLY EXPEDITE THE APPELLATE PROCESS. REFERENCES ARE FOOTNOTED. (DEP)