THANKS IN PART to the creation of the "3JX" expedited appeals process and a court invigorated with three new members, the NH Supreme Court has made significant inroads in its backlog of cases, issuing more than 130 opinions and disposing of more than 526 cases since the beginning of the year, court officials say.

According to Deputy Clerk David Peck, the court disposed of (including full opinions, 3JX opinions and other dispositions) 152 more cases than it accepted in the first six months of the year.

Compared to the 750 cases pending at the end of 2000, there were only 598 pending at the end of June 2001, the lowest level of pending cases since 1993. "In terms of pending cases, this is the best shape we’ve been in in 8 or 9 years," Peck said.

Of the backlog of 180 cases heard but not disposed of from before the release of the attorney general’s report in April 2000, only one case remains unresolved.

The 3JX process, itself the subject of an opinion regarding its constitutionality (NH v. Landry, No. 99-551), has also worked well; the justices have succeeded in meeting their goal of deciding the cases appearing on this docket within a month of argument. As of the end of July, only one case argued before that month had not been the subject of an order or other disposition. (Some of the cases have been referred back to the court for full argument.)

Landry, convicted of felony theft by deception, contended that the 3JX docket procedures violated his due process rights and demanded a hearing before the full court. The court ruled that since the NH Constitution does not guarantee a right to appeal, nor does it "provide that appellants are entitled to have their arguments heard by five judges, to fifteen minutes of oral argument or to a full written opinion."

The 3JX docket is limited to those cases identified by the court in its screening process as "single issues cases in which the court will apply settled law to the facts of the case, error-correction cases and cases involving allegations of abuse of discretion..." and cases in which no substantial issue of law is presented or where the question involves sufficiency of evidence. The orders are "unpublished" and do not appear on the court’s official Web site. Each carries the following disclaimer: "Orders issued by the 3JX panels of the New Hampshire Supreme Court are without precedential effect and may not be cited for any proposition of law or as an example of the proper resolution of any issue."

In rejecting Landry’s claim, the court, in a unanimous opinion written by Justice Duggan, addressed the possibility that in deciding cases with orders that have no precedential value, the court "might not be as rigorous in its analysis..." The court contended that its written orders, although not as detailed as opinions, "must justify the result based on applicable law, and must set forth the basis for its decision in the order."

Secondly, the court noted, 3JX orders are public documents, available for review and, at present, published by the New Hampshire Bar Association. "The orders are therefore subject to review and criticism by the public."

"These requirements minimize the risk that the case will be disposed of on an erroneous or impermissible ground," the court wrote.

These orders are available on our site under <"Publications."

Home | About the Bar | For Members | For the Public | Legal Links | Publications | Online Store
Lawyer Referral Service | Law-Related Education | NHBA•CLE | NHBA Insurance Agency | NHMCLE
Search | Calendar

New Hampshire Bar Association
2 Pillsbury Street, Suite 300, Concord NH 03301
phone: (603) 224-6942 fax: (603) 224-2910
email: NHBAinfo@nhbar.org
© NH Bar Association Disclaimer