An attempt to develop estimates of relative workload in the courts of appeals without detailed timekeeping by judges. Judges estimated the relative workload associated with various appeal types, and their estimates were used to calculate case weights. The report concluded that the weighted caseloads produced by this method were not useful measures of appellate workload, but cautioned that the method could not be adequately assessed given the inconsistencies in the appellate court statistical reporting systems in place in the mid-1970s.

Please note: There is a typographical error in this document. The number VI was accidentally skipped when putting together the sequence of tables, but no text or table is missing from the report.

Also note: This report is reprinted in Part Two of Managing Appeals in Federal Courts (1988).

A detailed listing of books, articles, and other research dealing with the operation of the appellate courts in general and reform of practices and procedures in particular. The Center was designated the depository for the Commission's publications and has archival copies of the Commission's two reports, The Geographical Boundaries of the Several Judicial Circuits: Recommendations for Change (1973), and Structure and Internal Procedures: Recommendations for Change (1975), as well as transcripts of the hearings before the Commission in its first phase (one volume) and second phase (two volumes).

The Federal Judicial Center prepared this report to assist the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure to evaluate reported problems with and potential amendments to Rules 28 and 32 on the content and cover of briefs. The report presents information received from the thirteen courts of appeals on every local rule or practice that imposes upon briefs and brief covers requirements that are not in the national rules. The report also describes the history behind the adoption of the local requirements, the extent to which courts enforce them, as well as the courts' plans to adopt more briefing requirements, problems courts have experienced under the current rules, and whether Rule 28 should be amended to prohibit further variations or to include additional or different briefing requirements.

An evaluation of the first experimental operation of the Civil Appeals Management Plan (CAMP) of the Second Circuit. The report evaluated a set of procedures designed to eliminate burdensome appeals, improve the quality of appeals, and expedite the appellate process through the use of mandatory scheduling orders and pre-argument conferences supervised by staff counsel. The report concluded that the initial experiment failed to provide conclusive evidence of the plan's substantive value but that further analysis is warranted (but see A Reevaluation of the Civil Appeals Management Plan).