Court Management

Court Management
Jalaine Franklin, Christina Franklin, Desiree Berry, Kaila Gaston,
Justin McKinney, & Jacinta Ingram
University of Phoenix
Sheree Corniel
January 03, 2013

Court Management
The courts are run off a hierarchical system a specific function and position. Two different categories of court are a part of the system to help keep it effective. Trial court has a purpose to find factual information and give judgment on any case that is presented in them. Appellate court does not try any cases that are presented in them. They are responsible for reevaluating decisions made by both trial and lower appellate courts, if they are up for a process of appeals. Appellate courts usually have much authority in changing the decisions made by the lower courts. The highest level of appellate courts in the United States is the Supreme Court. This court has absolute power over the constitution. These two forms of courts have different powers and their own interpretation of the law.
While the purposes and responsibilities of Courts core competency requires knowledge, reflection upon theoretic concepts, history and development over time (“Purpose and Responsibilities Of Court”, 2011). The core competencies along with the everyday judicial administration give meaning to the responsibilities and purpose competency. For example if there is knowledge that is absent, both managerial and judicial court leaders can lose their way during a court proceeds.
Individuals do not always do the right thing meaning, the legally right thing. There will always be arguments and disagreement along with conflicts regarding ones legal obligation. For example, If a case is moved down from filing to disposition in such a way to ensure, among other court purposes, individual justice in individual cases and the appearance of individual justice in individual cases — consistency and predictability in the application of law and procedural rules — courts resolve ever present private and public conflicts (“Purpose and Responsibilities Of Court”, 2011).
Many requirement of the adversarial process bring about balance whereas authority of the courts brings a substantial about of force that protects each person individually against the inconsistent use of power from the Government. The biggest strain is among social order and individual freedom, for both are perpetual to our being. First rate court leaders believe there is never one truth or one great way to proceed. They thrive on uncertainty and true but opposite mandates. Accomplished judicial administration is an uncanny marriage of incompatibles, a fusion of contradictions (“Purpose and Responsibilities of Court”, 2011).
The existence of courts is to improve social order, to bring a conclusion to disputes, to supply protection equally, and most importantly guarantee liberty, but most importantly to do justice. They were established so that the civil rights of all people along with the government would be reality, and not an articulation
The Office of State Court Administrator introduced Court consolidation in 1996, as a way of restructuring all paid court personnel, by blending them under one authority, which is the Circuit Clerk of the Courts. However, not everyone felt this was a good idea, they did not feel the courts should be able to make decisions on court performances. Then there were others, who saw it as the best thing. Because it brought teamwork to the court staff, shared goals with great satisfaction shared by all. Consolidation improved court performances by creating access to customers and accountability for court resources (Jennifer L. Mikeska). This gave court clerks the ability to give input on the positions they would like to hold, along with duties and responsibilities, with cross training, and work redistribution. These changes are long overdue in the structure of the court system.
The case flow management is one of the restructuring on future court process. The case flow management is the balancing of the court processes so that court cases will develop in a timely manner from filing to temperament. The administrations and judges can run the court smoothly and develop a growth when the case flow is constructing in a balanced process. The administration and judges can also heighten fairness when a court oversees case development from the time of filing, sets important events and closing date through the existence of a case, and delivers believable trail dates (Dator, 2009). To reach a judicial decision in every case judges also start out first with the administration. These administrators prepare the case flow throughout every court cases. Any individual would want to think that all judges organized their departments in a way every big corporation will run theirs. To managing the administration (employees) and the employee??™s presenting the cases to the judges, making financial arrangements, and in a timely manner with the records working process to schedule all judges must uphold his or her department (Robinson, 2009). These trail proceedings, which include all pre-trail events that follow termination and to make certain of the honor of all courts orders are in a timely manner are completing of post-testimony case activity. Case-disposition time standards are proved practice of a case flow management; the uses of differentiated case management are the early court interference and will be regulating in the court of the case progress. To make sure every plaintiff receives procedural due process and the same exact protection the case flow will help to be ensuring. When every case flow is correctly understood, every case flow management will be the balancing of the court processes.

When referring to the courts and their responsibilities, they all share the same primary purpose, which is to determine a proper verdict for the offender. A guilty verdict has to be determined by reviewing a substantial amount of evidence to prove without a reasonable doubt that an offender has indeed committed a crime. If there is not enough evidence against an individual the case could either be thrown out, or the alleged offender could be found not guilty for the crime they are accused of. The court provides an environment where the prosecution and the defense can argue their points and prove if the alleged offender id guilty or not guilty, the jury determines the final verdict and the appropriate sentence, and the judge acts as the manager and over sees the whole operation.

Dator, J. A. (2009). Futures and trial courts. Widener Law Journal, 18(2), 517-528.

Mikeska, L. Jennifer. The Court Consolidation. Retrieved from:

Robinson, M. B. (2009). Justice Blind Ideals and Realities of American Criminal Justice (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Hall

Purpose and responsibilities of court. (2011). Retrieved from

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *