Abstract
This article has two purposes. The first is to show that, indeed, the three categories of responses to caseload growth are the only feasible responses. This article argues that case-management techniques, another popular response, is of little or no use in reducing the substantial backlogs that result from the caseload growth. Instead of focusing on case management techniques one should focus on the judges - their number and their productivity - as sources of appellate court delay.
Recommended Citation
Marvell, Thomas B.
(1983)
"Appellate Capacity and Caseload Growth,"
Akron Law Review: Vol. 16:
Iss.
1, Article 4.
Available at:
https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol16/iss1/4