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?
- Can We Shorten This Trial?
- 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
- 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
- Statements of Decision: Errors, Omissions, and Solutions
Statements of Decision: Errors, Omissions, and Solutions
By John Derrick
John Derrick
Somewhere in the labyrinths of the Judicial Council, a working party has been trying to reform the widely unpopular system of statements of decision. But the word on the judicial street is that the reform initiative has stalled. It’s not that there’s a lobby determined to protect the status quo. It’s that no one can agree on a better alternative.
But there is a simple solution, which has, to the best of my knowledge, been overlooked. Read on and you’ll find out what it is. First, however, a review of what’s wrong with the system now and how to avoid the most common pitfalls.