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?
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.