Monday, March 10, 2008

Pending motions list

In this morning's DBR, John Pacenti dimes out the district judges who have the most pending motions. Many judges check these stats out every month and want to make sure they have the lowest number of cases and motions.

When I clerked, Judge Davis would look at the list, but wouldn't really comment on it or seem to care too much about it. He always told us to work hard and not worry about the stats. (I guess his position might have been different if we were at the bottom of the list and not in the middle of the pack.)

Unless there is some glaring problem with a case or a motion that has hung around longer than it should, I think these lists are pretty silly. It's more important to get it right than to do it quickly.

What say you, SDFLA readers? (And pay no attention to Mr. Grumpy in the comments).


Anonymous said...

Delay in ruling is a real problem. Two or three months, no big deal. A year to 18 months later -- a big deal. I've known of a situation where a judge neglected to rule on a motion to dismiss for a year -- and then denied a motion for a continuance. Somehow, I don't think delay was a consequence of trying to get the right ruling. . .

Todd and in Charge said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

A motion for attorneys' fees that I filed following an admiralty bench trial languished before the magistrate for 14 months! There was absolutely no reason for it, as the right to fees was a granted by the same contract on which the defendant lost the case on the merits.

But sometimes judges are too quick to grant motions. One particular judge is notoriously hostile to removal petitions under 9 U.S.C. § 205, and she likes to quickly grant remand requests, leaving the petitioner without any appellate remedy.