Litigation
Cal. Litig. 2014, Volume 27, Number 1
Content
- Plagiarism: Naughty, Knotty
- "I Learned About Litigating from That" In Memory of Joel a. Cohen
- Masthead
- Another Amazing Year in the Supreme Court
- Adr Update: Can Post-Award Searches Vacate Arbitration Awards?
- Editor's Foreword Signing On: Big Shoes to Fill
- Litigation Section Executive Committee Past Chairs
- The Perils of Punishing Public Employees for Protected Speech: Applying Pickering v. Board of Education to Posts and Pins
- Statements of Decision: Errors, Omissions, and Solutions
- Table of Contents
- McDermott On Demand: Ozymandias?
- Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame (2004): 62 Years in the Practice of Law
- Officers of a Court Do Not Plagiarize
- Hypotheticals on Litigational Plagiarism:
- Past Editors-in-Chief
- From the Section Chair
- Can Use of Administrative Procedures Expedite Complex State Court Civil Litigation?
- 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?