NCJ Number
              84719
          Journal
  Policy Studies Journal Volume: 10 Issue: 4 Dated: (June 1982) Pages: 663-779
Editor(s)
          
                      P L Dubois
                    
      Date Published
  1982
Length
              118 pages
          Annotation
              This article summarizes nine essays in a symposium that addresses a variety of methodological, theoretical, and empirical issues associated with evaluating reforms in the structure, staffing, and operation of State and Federal courts.
          Abstract
              The first two papers provide overviews of major judicial reform issues, beginning with an outline of changes in the Federal judicial administration during the tenure of Chief Justice Burger.  The companion essay focuses on State court reforms, with attention to political forces that often clash in this area. Perspectives on the increasing bureaucratization of American courts are offered by an analysis of nonadversarial proceedings and an empirical study of judicial involvement in pretrial case processing. The next presentation reviews research on mediation and arbitration, concluding that these methods have some value as alternatives to court in terms of cost, flexibility, and perceived fairness to litigants. The problem of simultaneously protecting judicial independence while assuring quality judicial performance is then considered. While one study assesses research on the major alternative methods of State judge selection, the other explores ways to evaluate the performance of sitting judges. An analysis of the consequences of the Judges' Bill of 1925 provides one view on court organizational innovation, and another paper argues that a franchise, corporation, or Federal model of court organization might be more appropriate than the traditional vertical authority structures. The symposium closes with a discussion of Chief Justice Burger's proposal that every new piece of Federal legislation that might create new cases for the Federal courts be accompanied by a judicial impact statement. The article included four references. For individual papers, see NCJ-84720-6 and 83826. (Author summary modified)