Judicial efficiency achieved by filtering cases that do not deserve trial and litigants' right to access to justice are competing values of most of civil justice systems. How these two values are interacting and how these are balancing influence actors of the system, decide effectiveness of legal institutions, and lead future civil procedure reforms. Through analysis of Korean civil litigation proceedings, existing studies, observations of court hearings, and interviews with Korean judges and lawyers, this dissertation investigates how disposition without trial and related procedural safeguards of Korean civil procedure are actually working and how interactions between efficiency and procedural fairness influence actual use of procedural mechanisms. Based on that, this dissertation evaluates comparative law projects that recommend adoption of disposition without trial of the U.S. civil procedure suggested by Korean legal scholars. This dissertation argues that fundamental procedural values in action that are unique in certain society and at certain time period decide actual use of procedural devices and effectiveness of legal reforms. It also contends that, in Korean context, maximum level of access to adjudication on the merits and truth finding function of civil litigation are driving judges' and lawyers' civil litigation practices toward minimal use of disposition without trial that limits litigants' access to court and maximum use of procedural safeguards, thus establishing a one-sided model biased with access to justice in terms of balancing model. By applying this explanatory theory to comparative civil procedure projects in Korea, this dissertation evaluates these projects in light of considering fundamental procedural values in action; and illustrates the ways of designing comparative civil procedure projects that appropriately reflects contexts of adopting society and raises effectiveness of the legal reforms.

Pretrial services (PS) programs can be valuable resources for making significant improvements in the criminal justice system because they are used in the early stages of the criminal case process. This report provides a review of issues and practices in the PS field. It describes how pretrial programs operate, discusses key policy issues, and outlines issues and challenges for the future. It pays particular attention to how PS programs obtain and convey information relevant to the pretrial release/detention decision. Describes how PS agencies, the court, and other criminal justice system agencies can work together to minimize the risks of nonappearance and pretrial crime.

This report presents an evaluation of Neighborhood Court, a restorative justice diversion program run by the District Attorney in San Francisco. A randomized trial indicates that the program reduces recidivism (although this result is statistically insignificant), a discrete choice experiment shows demand and public willingness to pay for its features, and a qualitative analysis demonstrates positive perceptions of the program among stakeholders.

The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.