-

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.

A study requested by the Federal Courts Study Committee Implementation Act of 1990 of the problems facing the federal courts of appeals and the numerous changes, structural and otherwise, that have been suggested as solutions. Areas of concern include the increased volume of appeals, the effects of caseloads on the quality of appellate decision making, intercircuit and intracircuit conflicts, the preservation of appellate traditions, and the scope of federal jurisdiction. The study outlines proposed changes to the structure of the courts, as well as techniques used by judges to keep pace with increased caseloads. The study concludes that no major proposal for change to the structure of the courts would substantially reduce appellate filings in the near future.

Related Resources

In 1997 Congress created the Commission on Structural Alternatives for the Federal Courts of Appeals to study the structure and alignment of the federal appellate system, with particular reference to the Ninth Circuit. In its final report, the Commission recommended several measures to "equip the courts of appeals with an ability, structurally and procedurally, to accommodate continued caseload growth into the indefinite future, while maintaining the quality of the appellate process and delivering consistent decisions--assuming, of course, that the system has the necessary number of judges and other resources." The five-member Commission was chaired by Retired Justice Byron White.

All documents published by the Commission on Structural Alternatives for the Federal Courts of Appeals, including its Final Report, are available in an electronic research collection that is maintained by the University of North Texas Libraries at http://www.library.unt.edu/gpo/csafca/app_comm_uscourts_gov.html . The University of North Texas Libraries and the U.S. Government Printing Office, in a Federal Depository Library Program partnership, established this site to provide permanent public access to the publications of the Commission on Structural Alternatives for the Federal Courts of Appeals.-The commission was created by Public Law 105-119 on November 26, 1997. This site exists exactly as it did when the Commission closed operation in March 1999.