VOLUME AND DELAY IN THE FLORIDA DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL - FIRST DISTRICT

• NCJ Number: 67885
• Author(s): J A MARTIN; E A PRESCOTT
• Date Published: 1980
• Length: 97 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 Institute of Justice/
• Publication Type: Statistics
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: VOLUME AND DELAY STAFF STUDY SERIES

Annotation

A REPORT PREPARED BY THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURTS FOCUSING ON THE PROBLEMS OF VOLUME AND DELAY IN THE FLORIDA DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST DISTRICT, IS PRESENTED; APPLICABILITY TO OTHER COURTS IS NOTED.

Abstract

THE REPORT, PART OF A SERIES OF 11 SUCH WORKS, IS THE PRODUCT OF AN EXTENSIVE DATA COLLECTION EFFORT UNDERTAKEN IN AUGUST 1978 AS PART OF A NATIONAL EXAMINATION OF APPELLATE COURT DELAY PROBLEMS. TWO TYPES OF INFORMATION WERE USED FOR THE WORK. THE FIRST TYPE IS DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION CONCERNING COURT RULES AND PROCEDURES ACQUIRED THROUGH SITE VISITS TO THE COURT. THE SECOND TYPE OF INFORMATION IS QUANTITATIVE DATA WHICH DESCRIBE THE COURT'S CASELOAD IN TERMS OF CASE CHARACTERISTICS AND TIME LAPSE IN PROCESSING. THE QUANTITATIVE DATA WERE DERIVED FROM A SYSTEMATIC SAMPLE DRAWN FROM THE COURT RECORDS OF 476 CASES PROCESSED FROM 1975 THROUGH 1976. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE PREDECISION PHASES OF THE APPELLATE PROCESS PRESENT PROBLEMS FOR THE COURT. CASES OFTEN EXCEED THE COURT'S MAXIMUM TIME LIMITS FOR FILING BRIEFS, RECORDS, AND TRANSCRIPTS. ATTORNEYS AND TRIAL COURT CLERKS APPEAR TO BE THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF DELAY AT THIS STAGE. TRIAL JUDGES MAY BE CONTRIBUTING TO THE PROBLEM BY NOT UNIFORMLY MONITORING THE PERFORMANCE OF ATTORNEYS, CLERKS, AND REPORTERS DURING THE INITIAL STAGES OF THE APPELLATE PROCESS. DATA ANALYSIS ALSO REVEALED THAT LITIGANTS WHOSE CASES INVOLVED ORAL ARGUMENT MUST OFTEN WAIT A SUBSTANTIAL LENGTH OF TIME FOR THEIR CASES TO BE HEARD. THE COURT APPEARS TO BE OPERATING EFFICIENTLY AT THE DECISION STAGE. HOWEVER, THE COURT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN HEARING ENOUGH CASES EACH MONTH, INADVERTENTLY ENCOURAGING DELAYS AT THE MATERIALS PREPARATION AND WAITING STAGES. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE COURT IMPLEMENT NEW POLICIES REGARDING PREDECISION STAGE ACTIVITIES AND MONITOR FILING PRACTICES MORE CLOSELY. THE APPELLATE COURT, RATHER THAN THE TRIAL COURT, SHOULD GRANT FILING EXTENSIONS. ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF DELAY INCLUDE THE COURT'S SCHEDULING AND CIRCUIT RIDING PROCEDURES AND THE FACT THAT THE COURT SITS IN ONLY ONE PANEL AT A TIME. FINALLY, AN EFFECTIVE CASE TRACKING SYSTEM WOULD ENABLE THE COURT TO RAPIDLY IDENTIFY CASES WHICH ARE OVERDUE AND WOULD PROVIDE A MEANS TO EVALUATE THE SYSTEM'S EFFECTIVENESS. FOOTNOTES, TABLES, FIGURES, AND APPENDIXES WITH STUDY DATA ARE INCLUDED IN THE REPORT.