U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Judging the Need for Judges

NCJ Number
86425
Journal
State Court Journal Volume: 6 Issue: 4 Dated: (Fall 1982) Pages: 4-8,38
Author(s)
V E Flango; M E Elsner
Date Published
1982
Length
6 pages
Annotation
The National Center for State Courts evaluated various redistricting plans for Nebraska's district and county courts, offering suggestions about judicial workload measures currently in use.
Abstract
The task was to develop a statistical method of allocating an existing number of judgeships equitably among the judicial districts and to determine which districts should have priority when additional judgeships are allocated. The Equal Proportions (or Huntington) Method (described in the appendix) assessed the current assignment of district and county judges to the 21 judicial districts and determined the statistically best assignment of judges to the proposed judicial districts for each redistricting plan. The caseload weighting systems used by the district and county courts were examined and compared with weighting systems used by various other States. Weighted and unweighted caseload data per judge in 1980 were the comparison criteria. Finally, the caseloads of both district and county courts were projected to 1985. A reevaluation of redistricting plans based on projected unweighted filings using the current number of judges indicated that the plan identified as best for both courts would still provide an equitable distribution of judges in 1985. Before adopting the final plan, the legislature must evaluate each of the statistically acceptable plans by other nonstatistical criteria, such as geographical and political considerations, local customs, and public opinion. Two notes are provided.