Memorandum

To:	Judge Dorothy Toth Beasley
From:	William L. Martin, III
Subject:	Checking of Briefs by Clerk's Staff
Date:	November 5, 1997

Thank you for your memorandum of October 30, 1997 regarding the compliance of Rule 27 (c) (3) by clerk's office staff. As your memo states, the clerk's office staff currently reviews the briefs to ascertain if they are sited to the record and the transcript.

You suggest that the clerk's office staff could also check for compliance with Rule 1 (b), regarding the type size and number of pages. Currently, if Gail or Marti as her backup, find a brief not in compliance with Rule 27(c) (3), that brief is flagged for central staff to review. The reason that it is flagged for central staff is because Gail and Marti are not attorneys, and the decision to return a brief for redacting and recasting is one the Court makes. Central staff was to review the work of the clerk's office staff to make sure the clerk's office staff had correctly identified the brief as one which needed to be returned. It was my understanding that central staff was to review this work so that the judges' staff attorneys would not have to be dealing with this matter unless it was one in which really needed to be returned to the attorneys.

As far as where the clerk's office sends briefs they feel do not comply with Rule 27(c) (3), we are happy to send them to central staff or to the judge's office, wherever the Court deems appropriate.

I do object to requiring the clerk's office staff to be responsible for assuring compliance with Rule 1(b) regarding the type size and number of pages. When you mentioned that since the clerk's office is already checking for sites to the record and the transcript, the clerk's office can also measure the type size. This seemingly in consequential step would require a lot of additional time for clerk's office personnel.

Currently, Gail is the person who receives the briefs, checks to see that they are signed, have a certificate of service, an original and two copies, dockets the brief, marks them for the respective judge's offices and puts them with the record or in the judges' mail cart. There are approximately 2,600 direct appeals filed each year, with each case having at least two briefs, and many cases having four or five briefs. This added burden of checking for the type size on all these briefs will entail much more time for Gail. She has a stack of briefs two feet high to deal with at just about every mail call as it is.

There are approximately 260 direct appeals per judge per year. This averages 87 cases per law clerk per year or 1.67 cases per law clerk per week. This does not consider those cases which are assigned to Judge Banke to hear for the Court. Additionally, approximately 14% of all docketed cases are dismissed by central staff further reducing the workload to about 1.5 cases per staff attorney per week.

In that same timeframe , Gail is required to process the 2,600 briefs of the appellant, appellee, reply briefs, supplemental briefs, amicus briefs and all motions filed. Additionally, she opens all the mail, clocks and stamps, sorts and does computer entry and distribution of all incoming mail, gives me the case history on all prisoner correspondence and assists in filling in when other people are out.

She handles the swearing in of attorneys, assists in the mass swearing in and does the calligraphy for the certificates for all new attorneys, along with assisting me in personnel matters and other various duties required of the clerk and the deputy clerk.

As an alternative to adding this duty to the clerk's office, I would suggest that when the briefs are filed, they go up to the judge's offices. The staff attorney assigned to that particular case can review the brief to make sure that it complies with Rule 1(b) and Rule 27 (c) (3). Any questions and concerns can be immediately discussed with the respective judge and the clerk's office can be directed by the Court as to the appropriate action to take in the individual cases. Fortunately, the great majority of briefs and motions which are docketed, comply with the physical requirements of the briefs.

After the judge's office has reviewed the briefs, they can be marked, either on the brief, or with a Court action ticket, as to being acceptable and John Daniel can pick them up from the judge's offices and they can be re-filed with the record.

These are my thoughts on that matter. If you would like to discuss it with me in greater detail, please do not hesitate to contact me.

cc:	Chief Judge Gary B. Andrews

Judge Edward H. Johnson

Presiding Judge Marion T. Pope