U.S. Code » Title 28 » Part PART I— ORGANIZATION OF COURTS › Chapter CHAPTER 23— CIVIL JUSTICE EXPENSE AND DELAY REDUCTION PLANS

28 U.S.C. § 474

Review of district court action

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)(1) The chief judge of each district court in a circuit and the chief judge of the circuit shall, as a committee—(A) review each plan and report submitted pursuant to section 472(d) of this title; and(B) make such suggestions for additional actions or modified actions of that district court as the committee considers appropriate for reducing cost and delay in civil litigation in the district court.(2) The chief judge of a circuit may designate another judge of the court of appeals of that circuit, and the chief judge of a district court may designate another judge of such court, to perform that chief judge’s responsibilities under paragraph (1) of this subsection.(b) The Judicial Conference of the United States—(1) shall review each plan and report submitted by a district court pursuant to section 472(d) of this title; and(2) may request the district court to take additional action if the Judicial Conference determines that such court has not adequately responded to the conditions relevant to the civil and criminal dockets of the court or to the recommendations of the district court’s advisory group.(Added Pub. L. 101–650, title I, § 103(a), Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5093; amended Pub. L. 102–198, § 2(2), Dec. 9, 1991, 105 Stat. 1623.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1991—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 102–198, § 2(2)(A), substituted “chief judge” for “chief judges” and struck out “court of appeals for such” after “judge of the” in introductory provisions.

Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 102–198, § 2(2)(B), substituted “circuit may designate another judge of the court of appeals of that circuit,” for “court of appeals” and “court, to perform that” for “court to perform the”.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1992–1992 · leading case: Minder v. Rigatti
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Minder v. Rigatti (1992) ca3 “2 The district court *1375 plans, which require review by the chief judges of the relevant district and circuit courts and by the Judicial Conference of the United States, see 28 U.S.C. § 474 , are designed to proscribe delay and to reduce expense by encouraging early judicial…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.