Back to Judicial Conference Comments Page
Following is the survey sent to Federal Court Judges and Magistrates by the Administrative Office and Automation Committee of the Judicial Conference and the responses received from judges in the Eleventh circuit. These responses, for all circuits, are also available in RTF format. In addition, individual letters were sent by certain judges. These may be found on the Judicial Conference Comments Page.
The comments have been excerpted for the Eleventh Circuit.
The Chief Judge of the Eleventh Circuit is [note information as to judges is current as of 1996]:
[to be provided]
See, critical comments re survey by Judge Leif M. Clark, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, Texas:
"I am concerned that the materials furnished in this survey were woefully inadequate in addressing what I believe are very real issues for the judges who are being asked to complete this survey. The questions in the survey are "bottom line," and do not reflect the nuances of the issue, or the myriad of reasons that a given judge may have answered in the way he or she did. As a result, I think it will be dangerous indeed to draw any conclusions of value with regard to the attitude of the federal judiciary to this issue."
To make your views known as to judges who have made anonymous comments, one could communicate with the Chief Judge of the Circuit wherein the judge sits. The Chief Judge is also one of the twenty-seven members of the Judicial Conference which will decide whether to adopt the ABA Proposal at the semi-annual meeting of the Judicial Conference in September, 1997.
ABA RESOLUTION ON UNIVERSAL CITATION SYSTEM
FEDERAL COURT JUDGE SURVEY FORM
1 Should the clerk of your court be required to add an official citation number beyond the case number to each opinion?
2. Should the federal judiciary Require the use of the official citation?
Permit it?
3 .Should federal judges number the paragraphs in fin opinion so that there may be Pinpoint citations in which no private sector company can have a copyright.
SUMMARY OF FEDERAL JUDGES SURVEY ON ADOPTION OF THE ABA CITATION RESOLUTION - ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ONLY
Legends
Judge Type - Cir = Circuit Dist = District Bank = Bankruptcy
Mag = Magistrate CFC = Court of Federal Claims CIT = Court of International Trade
Judge Type |
Cir. |
#1 |
#2a |
#2b |
#3 |
Comments |
Mag |
11 |
No.. |
no.. |
yes |
yes.. |
#1. No, but I do not strenuously object. #2a. No, but I do not strenuously object. #3. Yes, if cite is required. |
Dist |
11 |
yes |
no |
yes |
no |
|
Mag |
11 |
yes |
no.. |
Yes |
yes |
#2a. No, unless the opinion is only available in electronic, machine-readable format. |
Mag |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Mag |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
no! |
no! |
yes |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
This appears to be a lot to do about nothing! |
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Bank |
11 |
no! |
No |
Not necessary |
no |
|
Cir |
11 |
no... |
no.. |
no |
no.... |
#1. Absolutely not #2. Absolutely not #3. No. More work for the judiciary - West copyright in pinpoint cites will not survive any further judicial scrutiny in my studied opinion. |
Mag |
11 |
no |
no |
yes |
no |
|
Mag |
11 |
No! |
No |
yes |
No |
|
Mag |
11 |
no |
no |
yes |
no |
|
Mag |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Bank |
11 |
no |
no |
yes |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
no! |
no |
yes |
no... |
#3. Absolutely not! |
Dist |
11 |
... |
No |
yes |
|
#1. The Clerk, who is understaffed and overworked, should not be burdened with a new unfunded requirement. #2a. No, but encourage it. #3. No. It is added unnecessary work, unless more law clerks or other staff is added to Chambers. |
Bank |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Bank |
11 |
no |
no |
o.k. |
No... |
#3. Shouldn't be Required. Some may wish to do so. |
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
|
no |
|
Bank |
11 |
no |
no |
yes |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
yes |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
.... |
No |
.... |
.... |
#1. Absolutely not. #2b. Citations are standards which should be generated by the publishers and the market place-- not by the courts #3. Federal judges should write their opinions any way they choose. (Cite) |
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
yes |
... |
#3. Should be optional |
Bank |
11 |
no |
no |
N/A if not one |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
yes |
no |
yes |
yes |
|
Bank |
11 |
... |
... |
|
... |
#1. This would not cause any unnecessary administrative burden. #2a. In my view, the federal judiciary should require one official form of citation. #3. No. I do not see a need for it, and I am of the opinion that it would just add an administrative burden to the opinion writing process. I see no benefit to be derived from this. |
Bank |
11 |
yes |
no |
yes |
yes |
|
Dist |
11 |
yes... |
|
Yes |
no |
#1. Yes or the judge's secretary - depends on whether the sequential # applies to each judge in a multi-judge district or whether the #s are sequential to all District opinions. |
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
yes |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Bank |
11 |
no... |
no.. |
no.. |
no.. |
#1. No. An additional number would only cause confusion to practitioners. #2a. No. The courts should continue to use the uniform citation. #2b. No. To allow the use of another form of citation would destroy any uniformity that is now in place with the Bluebook. #3. No. Pinpoints that reference page numbers in the reporters suffice. |
Cir |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
no... |
no |
... |
|
#1. No, absent adequate funding from the ABA. The District's resources are already spread too thin to require the clerk to devise and implement an official citation number system. Additionally, the proponents of the "uniform" citation system fail to realize the inordinate number of written orders--from the brief (i.e. orders to show cause) to the lengthy (i.e., memorandum opinions) ones--generated by the judges in any particular dist. On any given day. Any attempt to consecutively number such a voluminous number of orders would be impracticable. #2b. yes, provided that the citing party provides the proper parallel citation |
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
yes |
... |
#3. I would prefer not having to number every paragraph --- or having to read long opinions with every paragraph numbered. |
Mag |
11 |
.... |
yes.. |
yes |
|
#1. Because a multi judge/magistrate judge/bankruptcy judge District issues numerous opinions any such requirement may require additional personnel. I am opposed to the concept unless adequate funding is also provided. #2a. If adopted, yes. #3. Although such a requirement is not onerous in light of computer/word processing, I have no specific opinions-one way or the other. I also recognize that its implementation may eliminate copyright problems. |
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
yes |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
yes |
no |
|
Mag |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Dist |
11 |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Cir |
11 |
no |
no |
open |
open |
|
Bank |
11th |
no... |
no.. |
no... |
|
#1. No. The case numbers in our Court have four distinct components. (e.g. 96-354-BKC-3P7), and adding an additional citation number would only further complicate the recording process. #2a. No. The federal judiciary should continue to utilize the uniform system of citation taught in law schools across the country - The Bluebook. #2b. Discretionary use of an alternate citation system would only serve to upset the uniformity. #3. Sequential numbering of paragraphs would not place an undue burden on the judiciary, and could be provided to assist with pinpoint citations. |