skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 49827 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: CALIFORNIA - JUDICIAL COUNCIL - MASTER-INDIVIDUAL CALENDAR STUDY
Corporate Author: California Judicial Council
United States of America
Project Director: J G FALL
Date Published: 1974
Page Count: 265
Sponsoring Agency: California Council on Criminal Justice
Sacramento, CA 95823
California Judicial Council
San Francisco, CA 94102
National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America
Document: PDF
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: AN ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CALENDARING SYSTEMS (PROCEDURES FOR ASSIGNING AND SCHEDULING COURT APPEARANCES) USED BY COURTS IN CALIFORNIA AND OTHER STATES IS DOCUMENTED.
Abstract: TWO MAJOR SYSTEMS ARE DISTINGUISHED: INDIVIDUAL (ALL-PURPOSE) CALENDARING, IN WHICH EACH CASE IS ASSIGNED TO A JUDGE WHO IS THEN RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL PHASES OF THE CASE THROUGH FINAL DISPOSITION; AND THE MASTER (SPECIAL-PURPOSE) SYSTEM, IN WHICH, AS EACH SUCCESSIVE PHASE IS READY, THE CASE IS ASSIGNED TO A JUDGE WHO HANDLES THAT PHASE. THERE ARE ALSO HYBRID SYSTEMS AND TEAM SYSTEMS (ASSIGNING OF CASES TO TEAMS OF JUDGES WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL PHASES OF THE ASSIGNED CASE). THE REPORT SUMMARIZES CALENDAR SYSTEMS COMMON TO TRIAL COURTS, WITH REFERENCE TO THEIR ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES; CASE STUDIES OF EXPERIMENTS WITH ALTERNATIVE OR RECENTLY CHANGED CALENDAR SYSTEMS; A SURVEY OF CALENDAR PRACTICES IN THE SUPERIOR, MUNICIPAL, AND FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS IN CALIFORNIA; CALENDAR PRACTICES IN OTHER STATES; A STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES AND TECHNIQUES FOR EFFECTIVE CALENDARING AND CASE-PROCESSING MANAGEMENT; AND A PROPOSED METHODOLOGY FOR EVALUATING AND MONITORING CALENDAR AND CASE-PROCESSING SYSTEMS. IT WAS FOUND THAT NEARLY ALL CALIFORNIA SUPERIOR AND MUNICIPAL COURTS USE SOME FORM OF THE MASTER CALENDAR SYSTEM AND EXPRESS SATISFACTION WITH IT. A COMPARATIVE STUDY IN A LOS ANGELES (CALIF.) COURT FOUND THAT JUDGES USING THE MASTER CALENDAR PROCESSED CASES MORE EFFICIENTLY THAN JUDGES USING THE INDIVIDUAL CALENDAR. SEVERAL METROPOLITAN COURTS IN OTHER STATES HAVE USED INDIVIDUAL CALENDAR TECHNIQUES TO REDUCE DELAY AND BACKLOG. AT LEAST ONE LARGE METROPOLITAN COURT USES THE TEAM APPROACH. CALENDAR SYSTEM PERFORMANCE IS A FUNCTION OF ALL ELEMENTS IN THE CASE-PROCESSING SYSTEM, INCLUDING CONTINUANCE POLICY, JUDICIAL INVOLVEMENT IN SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS, AND STAFF SUPPORT. STATEWIDE ADOPTION OF ANY SINGLE CALENDAR SYSTEM IS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR CALIFORNIA. FURTHER EXPERIMENTATION WITH THE TEAM APPROACH AND STATEWIDE EVALUATION AND MONITORING OF CALENDAR SYSTEM EFFICIENCY ARE RECOMMENDED. THE CASE STUDIES OF CALENDAR SYSTEM EXPERIMENTATION DESCRIBE A COMPARISON OF MASTER AND INDIVIDUAL CALENDARS IN THE LOS ANGELES, CALIF., SUPERIOR COURT; INDIVIDUAL CALENDAR SYSTEMS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK COUNTY, N.Y., AND IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO; A HYBRID SYSTEM IN THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF WAYNE COUNTY, MICH.; AND A TEAM SYSTEM IN THE CIVIL COURT OF NEW YORK CITY. APPENDED MATERIALS INCLUDE A GLOSSARY, DETAILS OF THE LOS ANGELES CALENDAR EXPERIMENT AND OF THE SURVEY OF CALENDAR PRACTICES IN CALIFORNIA AND OTHER STATES (INCLUDING A TABLE SUMMARIZING CALENDAR PRACTICES IN EACH STATE), DETAILS OF STUDY METHODOLOGY, AND A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED--LKM)
Main Term(s): Court case flow management
Index Term(s): California; Court calendar models; Court case flow; Court case flow models; Michigan; New York; Ohio; Studies
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=49827

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.