The Logic of Court Reform: Is Frederick Taylor Gloating?

Abstract

Court reformers for the past 70 years have been advocating court unification. This reform has, within recent years, enjoyed amazing popularity. Dozens of states are presently considering and/or implementing structural and administrative consolidation of their judicial systems. Despite the significance of these reforms, little attention has been paid to the consequences and implications of judicial unification. The present undertaking represents an attempt to fill this void.

After discussing the underlying logic of court reform, the author assesses the utility of this "theory " relative to contemporary management thought. Because court unification was developed as a "cure-all," it suffers from overgeneralizations regarding the nature of state and local justice. Indeed, it is characterized as being in direct conflict with many of the most cherished aspects of local justice. A number of alternative reform strategies are offered as potential means of reconciling the need for competent judicial administration with a concern for local autonomy and other components of American judicial tradition.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Bar Association Commission on Standards of Judicial Administration . Standards relating to court organization. Chicago: American Bar Association, 1974.

Amos, J. Implementing management by objectives in Missouri government agencies . Midwest Review of Public Adiministration, 1977, 12 115-115.

Ashman, A. & Parness. J. The concept of an unified court system. Depaul Law Review, 1974, 24, 1-41.

Baar, C. The limited trend toward state court financing . Judicature, 1975a, 58, 323-329.

Baar, C. Separate but Subservient: Court budgeting in the states. Lexington: D. C. Heath, 1975b.

Berg, J. The district courts of Massachusetts . Judicature, 1976, 59, 344-352.

Berkson, L. The emerging ideal of court unification . Judicature, 1977, 60, 372-382.

Berkson, L. Unified court systems: A ranking of the States . Justice System Journal, 1978, 3, 264-280.

Berkson, L. & Hays, S. Court clerks: The forgotten politicians. University of Miami Law Review, 1976, 30, 499-516.

10.

Downie, L. Justice denied. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1972.

11.

Frank, J. Courts on trial: Myth and reality in American justice. New York: Atheneum, 1972.

12.

Gallas, G. The conventional wisdom of state court administration . Justice System Journal, 1976, 2, 35-55.

13.

Gazell, J. Lower court unification in the American States . Arizona State law Journal, 1974, 653-678.

14.

Gazell, J. Judicial management at the state level: Its neglect, growth, and principal facets . California Western Law Review, 1971, 7, 355-382.

15.

Hays, S. Court reform: Ideal or illusion? Lexington: D.C. Heath, 1978a.

16.

Hays, S.

Should courts try MBO?

Judicature, 1978b, 62, 85-93.

17.

James, H. Crisis in the courts. New York: David McKay Company, 1967.

18.

National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals . Courts. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1973.

19.

National Conference on the Judiciary . Justice in the states. St. Paul: West Publishing Company. 1971.

20.

Odiorne, G. Management by objectives. New York: Pitman Publishing Company, 1965.

21.

Pound, R. The causes of popular dissatisfaction with the administration of justice . Judicature, 1937, 20, 178-187.

22.

President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice . Task force report: The courts. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967.

23.

Saari, D. Modern court management . Justice System Journal, 1976, 2, 19-33.

24.

The District of Columbia Reorganization Act of 1970 . American University Law Review, 1976, 20, 237-251.

25.

Thompson, J. Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.

26.

Vanderbilt, A. Minimum standards of judicial administration. New York: The Law Center of New York University, 1949.