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