Litigation
Cal. Litig. 2014, Volume 27, Number 1
Content
- Adr Update: Can Post-Award Searches Vacate Arbitration Awards?
- Another Amazing Year in the Supreme Court
- Can Use of Administrative Procedures Expedite Complex State Court Civil Litigation?
- Editor's Foreword Signing On: Big Shoes to Fill
- From the Section Chair
- Hypotheticals on Litigational Plagiarism:
- "I Learned About Litigating from That" In Memory of Joel a. Cohen
- Litigation Section Executive Committee Past Chairs
- Masthead
- McDermott On Demand: Ozymandias?
- Officers of a Court Do Not Plagiarize
- Past Editors-in-Chief
- Plagiarism: Naughty, Knotty
- Statements of Decision: Errors, Omissions, and Solutions
- Table of Contents
- The Perils of Punishing Public Employees for Protected Speech: Applying Pickering v. Board of Education to Posts and Pins
- Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame (2004): 62 Years in the Practice of Law
- Can We Shorten This Trial?
Can We Shorten This Trial?
By Judge Michael Mattice
Judge Michael Mattice
Im in the third week of a one-week trial!" How many laments have we heard about excessively long trials from frustrated judges or lawyers? Think of this problem as a relic of the past, because courts and the public can’t afford to let it happen today. It consumes excessive court resources and it impedes access to the courts for other litigants.
The California Judicial Branch’s current economic stress compels us to study our entire operation from the point of view of efficiency. What can we do to timely complete cases — and trials — to conserve meager resources, all without compromising the quality and fairness of adjudication?