NCJ Number
69091
Journal
Stanford Law Review Volume: 32 Dated: (JANUARY 1980) Pages: 433-443
Date Published
1980
Length
11 pages
Annotation
THE POLICY OF CALIFORNIA CHIEF JUSTICES IN FILLING TEMPORARY VACANCIES ON THE STATE'S SUPREME COURT IS EXAMINED THROUGH ANALYSIS OF ASSIGNMENTS DURING THE PAST 25 YEARS.
Abstract
TO DETERMINE IF CHIEF JUSTICES TEND TO APPOINT INTERIM JUDGES LIKELY TO VOTE WITH THE APPOINTING CHIEF JUSTICE IN COURT DECISONS, THE STUDY EXAMINED ALL CASES DECIDED BY THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT FROM JUNE 1, 1954, TO MAY 31, 1979, IN WHICH AN INTERIM JUSTICE APPEARED. FOR EACH CASE, THE VOTES OF THE APPOINTING JUSTICE AND OF THE INTERIM JUSTICES WERE TABULATED, AND THE RESULTS INDICATED THAT INTERIM JUDGES AGREED (1) WITH CHIEF JUSTICE GIBSON 85 PERCENT OF THE TIME IN CLOSE CASES WHILE REGULAR JUDGES DID SO ONLY 50 PERCENT OF THE TIME, (2) WITH CHIEF JUSTICE BIRD 80 PERCENT OF THE TIME AS COMPARED TO 46 PERCENT FOR REGULAR JUDGES, (3) WITH CHIEF JUSTICE WRIGHT 73 PERCENT OF THE CASES AS COMPARED TO 54 PERCENT FOR REGULAR JUDGES, AND (4) WITH CHIEF JUSTICE TRAYNOR ONLY 52 PERCENT OF THE TIME AS COMPARED TO 54 PERCENT FOR REGULAR JUDGES. HOWEVER, AN ANALYSIS OF THE CASE OUTCOMES SHOWS THAT AN INTERIM JUSTICE'S VOTE WAS USUALLY UNNECESSARY AND INSURED CONCURRENCE OF FOUR JUDGES IN ONLY 74 CASES OR 11 PERCENT OF THE SAMPLE. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT, WHILE THE PRACTICE OF ASSIGNING INTERIM JUSTICES IN CALIFORNIA POSES THE DANGES OF ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED IMPROPRIETY, IT DOES LITTLE TO ASSURE AUTHORITATIVE DISPOSITION OF LEGAL ISSUES OR TO GUARANTEE A BETTER RESOLUTION OF THE CLAIMS OF THE PARTIES. MOREOVER, THE RISKS OF IMPROPRIETY MAY EASILY BE ELIMINATED BY (1) ASSIGNING ELIGIBLE JUSTICES TO THE SUPREME COURT BY LOT OR (2) IGNORING VACANCIES ALTOGETHER. THE STUDY IS SUPPORTED BY STATISTICAL TABLES AND FOOTNOTES.