Views from the Bench
| Jurisdiction | Utah,United States |
| Citation | Vol. 5 No. 4 Pg. 18 |
| Pages | 18 |
| Publication year | 1992 |
The Fifth Anniversary of the Utah Court of Appeals
Norman H. Jackson, J.
In 1984, the citizens of Utah approved a revision of the judicial article of the Utah Constitution, taking the first step toward initiating a State Court of Appeals. Governor Norman H. Bangerter then appointed a task force on the judicial article to identify major problems facing the judiciary and to recommend solutions. The task force identified three major areas demanding action: 1) burden of appellate delay; 2) lack of multi-judge review of circuit court decisions; and 3) organization and operation of judicial administration. In response to the first two problems above, the task force decided to create a Court of Appeals. They considered three alternatives to a Court of Appeals: 1) expanding the Utah Supreme Court; 2) expanding the Supreme Court to sit in panels; or 3) creating an "appellate" division of district courts comprised of panels of district judges. After considering the alternatives, the task force favored creation of the Court of Appeals. Utah thus became the thirty-seventh state to create an intermediate appellate court.
The growing popularity of appellate courts does not mean that they are a panacea for all appellate ills. In fact, some studies suggest that appellate courts are only a "temporary solution" to appellate backlog. But, wisely, the task force recommended creation of a hybrid model which has proved to be successful in managing the appellate case load of the state.
As a hybrid, the Utah Court of Appeals is neither a pure pour-over jurisdictional model nor a pure specified jurisdiction model. It is not a pure pour-over jurisdiction model because the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals each has specified jurisdiction. Nor is it a pure specified jurisdictional model because the Supreme Court has discretion to transfer cases to the Court of Appeals and to issue writs of certiorari to review Court of Appeals decisions. In addition, the Court of Appeals can transfer cases to the Supreme Court on its own motion by a majority vote of the judges.
The seven judges of the Court of Appeals hear cases in panels of three judges. One judge is assigned to chair each panel and one is assigned to author the opinion. A total of thirty-five different panel configurations is possible. At three-month intervals, panels are reconfigured by random computer assignment. The judges cannot hear any cases en banc. When inconsistent panel decisions occur, the Supreme Court may resolve the inconsistencies. Judges also take turns sitting on the law and motion panel in...
To continue reading
Request your trial