Transcript Case Management Issues

Discussion on
Strengthening the Courts &
Improving the Fair
Administration of Justice
Presented by:
The Honorable Bernice B. Donald
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1
Comparing Uganda & U.S.
Court Systems



In the United States, there are two judicial
systems: 1) federal and 2) state.
Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction.
Federal courts hear criminal prosecutions brought
by the United States government for violations of
federal law and civil cases that either (a) arise
under federal law or (b) arise under state law, but
(i) “diversity of citizenship” exists and (ii) the
amount in controversy is greater
than $75,000.00.
Comparing Uganda & U.S.
Court Systems
The State Court System:
Types of Cases
The Federal Court System:
Types of Cases






Cases that deal with the
constitutionality of a law.
Cases involving the laws and
treaties of the U.S.
Cases involving Ambassadors
and public ministers.
Disputes between two or more
states.
Admiralty law.
Bankruptcy.


Most criminal cases, probate (involving
wills and estates).
Most contract cases, tort cases
(personal injuries), family law
(marriages, divorces, adoptions).
Note that most (though not all) suits
involving federal claims can also be
heard in state courts. State courts are
the final arbiters of state laws and
constitutions. Their interpretation of
federal law or the U.S. Constitution
may be appealed to the U.S. Supreme
Court. The Supreme Court may choose
to hear or not to hear such cases.
Comparing Uganda & U.S.
Court Systems
The State Court System:
Selection of Judges
The Federal Court System:
Selection of Judges



“Article III” judges are
nominated by the President
and confirmed by the Senate.
They hold office during good
behavior, typically, for life.
Through Congressional
impeachment proceedings, federal
judges may be removed from
office for misbehavior.
“Article I” judges (e.g.,
Magistrate Judges; Bankruptcy
Judges). Method for
appointment varies.




State court judges are
selected in a variety of
ways, including:
election,
appointment for a given
number of years,
appointment for life, and
combinations of these
methods, e.g., appointment
followed by election.
Comparing Uganda & U.S.
Court Systems



Structure of the Federal Courts
1 - United States Supreme Court (9 justices)
13 - United States Courts of Appeals
94 - United States District Courts



United States Magistrate Judges also assist District Judges.
Other Courts: the United States Court of Claims (hears
most claims against the United States); the United States
Court of International Trade; the United States Bankruptcy
Courts (units of the U.S. District Courts).
Courts Outside the Judicial Branch: the U.S. Tax Court;
Military Courts; the Court of Veterans Appeals; federal
administrative agencies and boards.
Comparing Uganda & U.S.
Court Systems
•
•
•
•
Structure of the Federal Courts: Trial Courts
U.S. District Courts have “original jurisdiction” over the
overwhelming number cases filed in federal court.
The District Courts hear pretrial matters/motions, try the case
(with or without a jury), and enter a final judgment.
An aggrieved party may then appeal to the Court of Appeals,
usually the court of appeals for the geographical area in which
the District Court sits. (Example of Exception – Appeals in
patent cases are heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit.)
In certain cases, the District Court acts as an appellate court.
(E.g., Bankruptcy cases; appeals from administrative agency
denials of Social Security benefits.)
Comparing Uganda & U.S.
Court Systems
Comparing Uganda & U.S.
Court Systems
•
Structure of the Federal Courts: Courts of Appeals
Courts of Appeals – 12 regional circuits with a Court of
Appeals, plus the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
(which has nationwide jurisdiction).
•
•
E.g., the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit hears cases
from Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, and Michigan.
Appellate review is generally limited to the evidence in the
record created before the trial court (or the agency).
•
•
Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo, but questions of fact are
reviewed with great deference to the findings of the lower court or
tribunal.
Typically hear appeals in three-judge panels, except when entire court
hears it “en banc” for special reasons.
Comparing Uganda & U.S.
Court Systems
Structure of the Federal Courts: U.S. Supreme Court
•
•
•
•
1 Chief Justice and 8 Associate Justices.
Hears cases (from lower federal and state courts) at its discretion within the
guidelines set by Congress.
Hears cases as an entire court (all 9 justices present).
Hears relatively few cases– usually only for very important issues.
Comparing Uganda & U.S. Court Systems

Example federal case: John Jones sues his former employer, XYZ
Corporation, in U.S. District Court for employment discrimination in
violation of federal law.






The parties will engage in discovery (interrogatories, requests for
admission, and depositions).
Parties often file motions. Sometimes a motion may result in dismissal of
the case. (E.g., motion for summary judgment).
If not otherwise resolved (i.e., by motion or settlement), the case will
proceed to trial. The case may be heard by the judge or by a jury.
At trial, attorneys will present proof – usually in the form of testimony
from live witnesses. Testimony may also be presented by deposition,
which is testimony taken before the trial and preserved in writing or on
video by a court reporter.
After the ruling/verdict, there may be post-trial motions.
An aggrieved party may appeal.
Comparing Uganda & U.S.
Court Systems

Example federal case (continued): The aggrieved
party has appealed from the judgment of the U.S.
District Court.



The Court of Appeals may affirm, reverse, remand, vacate,
affirm in part and reverse in part, etc.
The case may reach the U.S. Supreme Court if a party
petitions for and receives a Writ of Certiorari from the Supreme
Court.
If remanded, the District Court will engage in further
proceedings, including a re-trial if necessary.
Questions?
Comparing Uganda & U.S.
Court Systems
Similarities between the U.S. and Ugandan Judiciaries:





A supreme court as a final arbiter exercising appellate review.
Judicial review of the constitutionality of laws.
Use of a professional judiciary in most instances, particularly at
the higher levels. (In the U.S., all federal judges are trained
lawyers, though U.S. Supreme Court justices do not have to
be.)
Legal system based on Anglo-American common law.
An element of duality: In the U.S., there exist both federal and
state laws (and in certain cases, the federal courts are bound
to apply state law). Does Uganda use both a common law
system and a system of unwritten customary laws?
What differences do you perceive
between the U.S. and Ugandan
judicial systems?
Individual Dockets





Assignment of judge at case filing
Case remains with the same judge until
conclusion
The judge is accountable for pace and
resolution of the case
Equal distribution of workload
Infrequent re-assignments
16
Early Court Intervention


Meaningful deadlines for serving and
responding to complaints
Initial case management conference and
order
17
Early Court Intervention


Meaningful deadlines for serving and
responding to complaints
Initial case management conference and
order
18
Early Court Intervention






In the United States, within 120 days of
service
Usually held shortly after answer (plea) is
filed.
Before conference, parties meet and prepare
case management plan.
Judge holds conference.
Judge issues case management order.
Possible application before appellate court.
19
Continuing Control of
Case Progress






Hold parties to schedule
Periodic status conferences in complex cases
Promptly resolve disputes that could delay
case
Promptly rule on motions (applications)
Promptly set final pretrial conference (if not
already set)
Never reach a point where a court deadline is
not in place
20
Maximizing Settlement
Opportunities Before Trial



Parties must discuss settlement at first
meeting
Set settlement discussion deadline in case
management order
Court annexed mediation
21
Final Pretrial Conference






In the U.S., held after close of discovery and
resolution of motions
Purpose: to create a binding plan for trial,
set parameters.
Lawyers meet and prepare a proposed final
pretrial order.
Final pretrial conference with court
Final pretrial order issued
High threshold for modifying order
22
Firm and Credible Trial Dates



When to set trials
Setting firm trial dates
Avoid granting continuances
23
Trial Management






Final pretrial order governs the trial
Hold parties to allotted time
Avoid trial interruptions
Lawyers submit proposed findings of fact
and conclusions of law before trial
Prompt rulings
Manage post-trial events
24
Enforcement Tools



For lawyers
For parties
For witnesses or third parties
25
Effective Information and
Reporting Systems

Individual Case Information



Docket information
Calendars – provide weekly or monthly to
judge
Cases approaching or exceeding time goals
26
Effective Information and
Reporting Systems



Courtwide caseload and performance
Individual judge statistics
With information systems, can set courtwide goals


Backlog reduction
Continuance rates
27
Criminal Case Management

Same principles apply




Individual dockets
Early court intervention
Continuing judicial control
Final pretrial conferences
28
Criminal Case Management

Other tools



Speedy trial rights
Discovery obligations
Plea bargaining
29
Judicial Time Management
Suggestions






Do tasks once
Decide matters promptly
Use computers
Use standardized forms where possible
Have the parties and lawyers help you
Do not hold hearings on every issue or
motion
30
Judicial Time Management
Suggestions

Backlogs




Require status reports: dismiss the case if
none is filed
Setting trials: roll call approach
Dismissal of unserved cases; demand for
default application in cases where no
response filed
Help from other judges on roll call
31
Court Governance

We live in an age of accountability and
increasingly available information. People
expect more services and deliberations
more quickly and more efficiently at a
lower cost.
32
Courts Must Be Public Service
Oriented
33
Focus on the Mission
34
Committed Leadership &
Court Members
35
Shared Responsibility
for Strategic Plan
Implementation
36
Set Performance
Standards & Hold
People Accountable
37
Transparency
38
Communication
39
Collegiality
40
Credibility
41
Integrity
42
“There are those that look at things
the way they are, and ask why? I
dream of things that never were, and
ask why not?”
-- Robert F. Kennedy
43
Envision the Type of Court
System that You & the
People of Uganda Want
44