You are here
In this issue of the International Judicial Observer:
- Major International Judicial Conference to Meet in Washington
- Legal and Judicial Reform in Bulgaria, by Mario Babitinov
- Progress Toward the Creation of an International Court, by William C. Gilmore
- Zambian Trips Provide Judge with Adventures, Insights into Africa, by J. Rich Leonard
- International law--A Binding Body of Rules for Nations to Follow, by Bruno A. Ristau
- Former U.S. Judge Presides at First International War Crimes Trial Since Nuremberg
- McDonald Heads Three-Judge Panel in The Hague, by James G. Apple
- Where to Find It: The Substance of International Law, by James G. Apple
A newspaper published by the Center in cooperation with the American Society of International Law. The International Observer covered international judicial issues. International Judicial Observer was published from 1995-1997. It ceased publication with issue number 4, June 1997.
Based on a survey of the federal district courts and an analysis of their rules, this sourcebook describes in detail how each court's ADR and settlement procedures functioned at the time of the survey. It also provides information for judges who design and refer cases to dispute resolution programs, for lawyers and litigants who face increasingly complex dispute resolution choices and obligations, and for policy makers and researchers who evaluate current programs and make recommendations for the future.
Prepared by the Federal Judicial Center with assistance from Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
For the main report see Civil Justice Reform Act Report: Development and Implementation of Plans by the United States District Courts (1995), which includes Appendix I, III, IV.
Appendix II was a prepublication version of The Civil Justice Reform Act Expense and Delay Reduction Plans: A Sourcebook (1995).
Long Range Planning Series, Paper No. 4
A discussion paper that analyzes arguments for and against incorporating ADR programs into the case-management procedures of federal district courts. The authors debate issues such as whether ADR is compatible with the role of the federal courts, whether ADR conserves litigants' costs and court resources, whether private or public-sector development of ADR is preferable, and whether mandatory or voluntary programs should be pursued.
An overview of the U.S. district courts' Civil Justice Reform Act expense and delay reduction plans. Seventeen tables summarize the courts' civil case management procedures and techniques in terms of common elements, such as service of process, motions, and alternative dispute resolution.
A prepublication version of this Sourcebook was issued as Appendix II to the Civil Justice Reform Act Report of the Judicial Conference of the United States, Report to Congress, December 1, 1994.
A report that uses trial attorneys' responses to a Center survey concerning 800 federal civil cases in assessing proposed amendments to Fed. R. Civ. P. 68 to make it more effective in encouraging settlement and reducing litigation. The results indicate that a more effective Rule 68 would be well received by most attorneys and would likely influence litigation in about 50% of civil cases, resulting in more and earlier settlements at reduced expense and with limited effects for litigants of modest means.
Based on presentations and discussions at a conference for federal judges held in late 1993, articles in this issue of FJC Directions acquaint readers with the context in which ADR is developing, define the principal types of ADR used in the federal courts, document the development and emerging role of ADR administrators in eight courts,and discuss the practical problems of evaluating and monitoring ADR procedures. In this issue of FJC Directions:
- ADR and the Federal Courts: Questions and Decisions for the Future, by William W Schwarzer, page 2
- ADR in the Federal Trial Courts, by Donna Stienstra, page 3
- Judicial Referral to ADR: Issues & Problems Faced by Judges, by Carrie J. Menkel-Meadow, page 8
- Differentiated Case Management Can Help Make ADR More Than an "Intermediate Irritating Event", by David W. McKeague, page 12
- The Arguments For & Against Mandatory Arbitration, by Wayne D. Brazil and William R. Wilson Jr., page 14
- Two ADR Administrators Reflect on Developing & Implementing Court-Annexed Programs, by Genevra K. Loveland, page 18
- Evaluating & Monitoring ADR Procedures, by Donna Stienstra, page 24
- Federal Court-Annexed ADR: After the Hoopla, by D. Brock Hornby, page 26
A statutorily mandated report on the pilot court-annexed voluntary arbitration programs in eight federal district courts. The study examines program use in the context of the programs' referral systems. It is a companion to the 1990 FJC study of mandatory court-annexed arbitration programs, Court-Annexed Arbitration in Ten District Courts.
In this issue of the State-Federal Judicial Observer:
- Disclosure Rules are Tested in State, Federal Courts: Federal Judge's Experiment with Proposed Disclosure Provisions Proves Successful, by William O. Bertelsman
- Disclosure Rules are Tested in State, Federal Courts: Mandatory Disclosure, Arbitration Rules Dramatically Affect Arizona Litigation, by James G. Apple
- Three National State-Federal Bodies Meet; Discuss Legislative Proposals Affecting State and Federal Courts
- Oklahoma Moves to Establish Three New State-Federal Judicial Councils
- State-Federal Coordination Nationwide is Goal in Breast Implant Litigation
- Judicial Education and Judicial Skills for State and Federal Judges--A Syllabus by William W Schwarzer
- Three New Bills May Affect Federal Court Criminal Caseloads
- State-Federal and Interstate Cooperation, Case Management Techniques Move Complex Litigation, Hasten Disposition of Asbestos, Other Cases, by Sandra Mazer Moss
- Special Seminar for State Judges Helps Relieve Tensions from Bankruptcy Stays
- State, Federal Courts Cooperate in Prospective Juror Selection and Jury Service Programs, by G. Thomas Munsterman & David Williams
- Focus On: Historic Courthouse -- The courthouse in Greensburg, Green County, Kentucky, is the oldest standing courthouse west of the Allegheny Mountains. It was built in the years 1802-1804. (includes photograph)
The State-Federal Judicial Observer was published from 1993-1999 as an occasional newsletter. It was issued by the Center's Interjudicial Affairs Office to further the Center's statutory charge to further cooperation between the state and federal judiciaries. Issues covered a range of topics relating to judicial federalism and provide updates on state-federal judicial councils in the states that have them.
The Federal Courts Study Committee's Working Papers and Subcommittee Reports constitute Part III of the Committee's report. These materials were valued background materials which the Committee determined should be published for general consideration whether or not the Committee agreed with their substantive proposals. In no event should these working papers and subcommittee reports be construed as having been adopted by the Committee.
Availability — Printed copies the Federal Courts Study Committee's Working Papers and Subcommittee Reports are not available for distribution from the Federal Judicial Center. When the Committee issued its final report, and working papers and subcommittee reports, it sent printed copies to federal courts libraries. Please check your court library for local availability of the Committee's materials.