 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 
|
|
 |
||||||||||||||||
|
Bar News - April 9, 2004 Individual Docketing System Starts in June for Superior Courts THE NEW HAMPSHIRE Superior Court recently issued Superior Court Administrative Order No. 33, which establishes a system of individual docketing for all new cases filed in New Hampshire’s eleven superior courts on or after June 1, 2004 (See accompanying order). Under the individual docketing system, each newly filed case will be assigned to a specific judge or master, as appropriate, who regularly sits at the court location in question and, with limited exceptions, the case will remain with that judge or master until it is finally concluded. The system is based on the model that has been in place in the Hillsborough North Superior Court in Manchester since 1999 and is similar to that used in the federal courts. Currently, with the exception of Hillsborough North, the superior courts generally use a system known as master calendar docketing. Under such a system, case-related events, such as hearings or trials, are assigned to whatever judge or master is available on the day the event is scheduled. This is often inefficient because it often results in a judge being assigned to hear matters in an unfamiliar case and requires the repeating of factual or legal information that is already known to another judge. "Under the master calendar system, it is possible, for example, that one judge may preside over the initial scheduling conference held shortly after the case is filed, another judge may hear pretrial motions filed later in the case, and a third judge may preside at the trial," explains Chief Justice Robert J. Lynn. "Having to re-invent the wheel, so to speak, wastes time and occasionally can even lead to conflicting rulings in the same case." Additionally, lawyers and litigants who are unhappy with a judge’s ruling can abuse the master calendar system. "It is not unheard of for a litigant who discovers that his case is scheduled for a hearing before a judge who has ruled against him in the past, or who is thought to be unsympathetic to the litigant’s position, to find a reason for a last-minute continuance, in the hopes that the rescheduled hearing will be held before a different judge," notes Lynn. "The proper manner for correcting an erroneous ruling of a superior court judge is to take an appeal to the Supreme Court, not to attempt to reargue the issue before another superior court judge." Lynn believes the individual docketing system also increases the accountability and transparency of the judicial branch. Under the new system, responsibility for how a case is handled in superior court is placed squarely on the shoulders of the single judge or master to whom it is assigned. Along with installation of a new case management computer system in the near future, the individual docketing system will make it easier to compare the quantity and quality of work product generated by each judge and master. "I know that the judges and masters of the superior court are a tremendously hard-working and dedicated group of men and women, and this new docketing system will make it easier to demonstrate this fact to the public and to the other branches of state government," Lynn explains. The order does allow for the reassignment of cases from one judge or master to another where necessary for legitimate reasons, such as the recusal of the originally assigned judge or to promote the interests of justice or the convenience of the parties. Cases filed before June 1, 2004 will not be immediately subject to individual assignment on that date. Instead, such cases will be assigned to a specific judge or master as they are scheduled for hearing or trial.
|
|
Home | About the Bar | For Members | For the Public | Legal Links | Publications | Online Store New Hampshire Bar Association |
