"To reduce and avoid delay, American courts have developed a set of principles and techniques since the 1970s that we refer to as "caseflow management" ... The main premise of this book is that caseflow management is more than just a way to reduce or avoid delay, however. In fact, caseflow management is the conceptual heart of court management in general. We can fully understand courts as organizations only if we understand the requirements of caseflow management. In managing a court, the chief judge and court managers should focus first on caseflow management - not just because it addresses problems of delay or backlog, but more importantly because it is the very foundation of court management in general." -- from the Introduction, p. xi.

This work provides a completely revised and updated monograph on caseflow management.

Contents: (1) Introduction: Time and Adolescence; Policy and Practice; (2) The History of Court Delay; (3) The Causes and Effects of Delayed Justice; (4) Controlling Court Delay: Legal/Professional Efforts; Managerial Efforts; (5) Controlling Juvenile Court Delay: Constitutional Provisions; Limiting Due Process for Juveniles; Legislation and Rules in the Juvenile Court; (6) Recent Trends in Delinquency Case Processing Time; (7) Delay Reduction Efforts in Three Juvenile Courts; (8) Conclusions; (9) References; Cases Cited; (10) Appendices. Charts and tables.

Traditional separation of powers theories assumed that governmental despotism will be prevented by dividing the branches of government which will check one another. Modern governments function with unexpected complicity among these branches. Sometimes one of the branches becomes overwhelming. Other governmental structures, however, tend to mitigate these tendencies to domination. Among other structures courts have achieved considerable autonomy vis-à-vis the traditional political branches of power. They tend to maintain considerable distance from political parties in the name of professionalism and expertise. The conditions and criteria of independence are not clear, and even less clear are the conditions of institutional integrity. Independence (including depolitization) of public institutions is of particular practical relevance in the post-Communist countries where political partisanship penetrated institutions under the single party system. Institutional integrity, particularly in the context of administration of justice, became a precondition for accession to the European Union. Given this practical challenge the present volume is centered around three key areas of institutional integrity, primarily within the administration of justice: First, in a broader theoretical-interdisciplinary context the criteria of institutional independence are discussed. The second major issue is the relation of neutralized institutions to branches of government with reference to accountability. Thirdly, comparative experience regarding judicial independence is discussed to determine techniques to enhance integrity.

"Project of the American Bar Association, Criminal Justice Standards Committee, Criminal Justice Section"--T.p. verso.

Around the world, access to justice enjoys an energetic and passionate resurgence as an object both of scholarly inquiry and political contest, as both a social movement and a value commitment motivating study and action. This work evidences a deeper engagement with social theory than past generations of scholarship.