The Special Masters' Subcommittee of the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules of the Judicial Conference asked the Center to examine how often judges appointed special masters and what functions they asked masters to perform. This report documents the incidence of recent special master consideration and appointment. The authors found that such activity was rare and occurred primarily in high-stakes cases that were especially complex. Party initiative, consent, or acquiescence provided the foundation for appointments and the basis for authorizing activities not contemplated by Rule 53. The subcommittee used the report along with other information in framing a proposed revision of Rule 53 that was published in August 2001.

This report concludes that the increase in civil appeals has resulted mainly from the increased volume of litigation in the district courts. The growth in appellate caseloads has been principally attributable to increasing rates of appeal in prisoner actions and, to a lesser extent, civil rights cases. No evidence of an across-the-board increase in the likelihood of appeal was detected. This report is reprinted at 18 Justice System Journal 233.

Bankruptcy courts are different from the district courts in the attorney conduct area in that attorneys who practice in bankruptcy courts are subject to a complex statutory system, which includes bankruptcy-specific conflict of interest criteria and other standards directly governing attorney conduct. The Judicial Conference Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure in conjunction with the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules requested the Federal Judicial Center to conduct a study of attorney conduct issues in the bankruptcy courts. In December 1998, the Center sent 317 questionnaires to all chief bankruptcy judges (including bankruptcy judges in districts with only one bankruptcy judge) and to all other bankruptcy judges. This report presents the results of the survey.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has proposed amending Rule 29 to preserve the government's right to appeal a trial court's decision to grant a motion for judgment of acquittal. DOJ argues, "Rule 29 as currently constituted represents an anomaly within the Rules and indeed within the judicial system." 

To help inform the debate, the Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules of the Judicial Conference of the United States asked the Federal Judicial Center to conduct a study of state laws that allow the trial judge to grant a motion for a judgment of acquittal prior to the case's submission to the jury. Specifically, the Committee wanted to know (1) whether a state judge may enter a judgment of acquittal before a jury verdict, and (2) whether the prosecution may appeal from judgments of acquittal directed by the trial judge prior to submission of the case to the jury.