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 District of Columbia 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 District of Columbia Circuit.
The Chief Judge of the District of Columbia 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 - DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 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 |
Cir |
D.C. |
No |
no |
yes |
no |
|
Cir |
D.C. |
yes |
|
yes |
no... |
|
Dist |
D.C. |
No |
no |
yes |
no.. |
#3. Many opinions at the District Court level are Bench opinions later printed out by court reporter and any # of paragraphs would be difficult and expensive. |
Dist |
D.C. |
No |
no |
no |
no |
|
Cir |
D.C. |
No |
no |
no |
no |
|
Cir |
D.C. |
No |
no |
yes |
no |
|
Cir |
D.C. |
No |
no |
yes |
no |
|
Dist |
DC |
no |
no |
no |
no |
|
Dist |
DC |
no |
yes |
|
no.. |
#3. While I understand the motivation behind the ABA's resolution (see USA, et al. V. The Thomson Corporation and West Publishing Company, No. 96-1415, December 23, 1996), I still believe that the easiest way for both judges and lawyers to cite cases is the old-fashioned way, to F.3d or F. Supp. It makes no sense either to burden the Clerk's Office or individual judges or to confuse lawyers and courts or make their work more difficult. Any suggestions that judges number the paragraphs in their opinions simply will not be followed and will not work. The result will be that some courts and some judges will follow the new suggestion and others will not, and this will create confusion. Please reject this proposal. |