10 Judges J. 1 (1971)

handle is hein.journals/judgej10 and id is 1 raw text is: JANUARY, 1971

Vol. 10, No. I

[no m to Sx'a g  of  th  Naio a  Co fre c  of t5t  Tra  'Judge- 0  s


Expediting The Disposition Of Litigation
Judge Griffin B. Bell
Chairman's Corner
Objectives Of Trial Justice
Shelden D. Elliott, Professor Emeritus
The Squad-Car Lawyer
Wayne W. Schmidt
Collecting Child Support Payments
In Imperial County, California
Judge George R. Kirk
Calendar Control: The Why Of It
Judge John W. Fritz
Judges In The News
Resolution -Establishment Of
National Judicial Center
Letters To The Editor
The Nature Of Responsible Dissent
Ambassador Kenneth B. Keating

Standards Relating To The Function
1     Of A Trial Judge
2     Slowing Trial Court Proceedings While
Speeding Up The Judicial Process
4        Judge Robert Beresford
Video Taped Confession Ruled Admissible
7        Joseph J. Musial
Garnishment Of Liability Insurance Policy
8     To Secure Jurisdiction
Professor David D. Siegel
9     The Lighter Side
10        Judge Temple Driver
The Institute For Court Management
11     My Kind Of Judge
12        Judge Wendell C. Tombaugh

United States Court of Appeals, Atlanta, Georgia

The pace of the federal appellate practice can
only be described as leisurely. This is permitted by
the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and is
encouraged     by   prevailing
attitudes and practices.
Judge Albert V. Bryan, in
an  article  For a Swifter
Criminal Appeal- to Protect
the Public as Well as the
Accused, XXV     Washington
and Lee.L. Rev. 175 (1968),
emphasized     the   lack  of
dispatch in federal appeals,
Judge Griffin B. Bell and  pointed  to  the sharp
contrast between the disposition of federal appeals
and appeals in Great Britain. The chief difference
lies largely in substituting oral presentation for
briefs and in ruling from the bench, with rare
exceptions, thus eliminating the time necessary for
opinion preparation.
The efficiency of the United States Court of
Appeals system can be substantially improved
without the necessity of making changes in the

Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (FRAP). It
will follow from changes in attitude and through
innovation. Improvement is already taking place in
some of the federal circuits. As an example, in
1968 and 1969 the Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit adopted two noteworthy policies and one
new procedure to this end.
One policy has to do with eliminating delays in
the preparation of the record which is to form the
basis of the appeal. Acting in its supervisory role as
a judicial council under 28 USC,  332, the court
adopted a restrictive policy for the district courts
in giving extensions under Rule I1(a), FRAP,
beyond the original 40-day period for transmitting
the record. Rule 1 l(d) allows the district court to
extend this time up to a total of 90 days for cause
shown. The Fifth Circuit judicial council policy
restricts this power to a showing of extraordinary
The council adopted a second policy that the
court of appeals will not grant extensions for
(continued on page 3)

Trial Judges' Journal

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 2,700 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.

Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Access to this content requires a subscription. Please visit the following page to request a quote or trial:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?