- Master calendar systems centralize information, making it easy for users (whether judges, court administrators, attorneys, parties or members of the public) to access case information and other scheduling details. If the master calendar is published online, parties can retrieve information without having to call the clerk's office and wait on hold until a representative is available to answer a question. Further, court representatives do not have to waste time retrieving information and answering questions about trial dates or scheduled hearings. Master calendars save time and hassle for both the court and the public.
- Master calendar systems synchronize the schedules of various persons of the court, thereby reducing the risk of conflicting calendars. Master court calendars also standardize the process of posting case information. No matter the judge, department or division, cases are each posted with the same criteria (i.e., case or filing number, style of the case and matter being heard by the court). Standardized formats for posted information make it easier for authorized users to add to the calendar and for other users to read the calendar.
- Master calendar systems often mishandle cases that are more complex. For easy and routine matters, the system assigns cases to trial according to a general time frame that serves the needs of the parties involved by allowing time for filing of motions and necessary pre-trial hearings. However, more complex cases often require later trial dates or require that the same judge handle all pre-trial motions and pleadings. According to Califonia attorney Rick Seabolt, the master calendar system used in most California state courts arbitrarily assigns matters to a judge for trial, but, problematically, pre-trial hearings and conferences are not always designated to the same judge. For more complex cases, it would be preferable for the same judge to handle all matters in a given case, since judges have to take time to research and prepare for more complicated issues. A single judge assigned to cases would save judges time and make it easier for counsel to communicate with the court, as attorneys would not have to wait for a new judge to learn about all the facts of the case.
- Master calendar systems result in numerous judges devoting time to handling disputes and issues of cases before trial. Although this method is not efficient for judges or for attorneys who have to present the facts of a case again before a new judge, it allows for various judges to read the case and interpret relevant law, perhaps challenging the insularity or biases of a single judge. Master calendar systems facilitate a more comprehensive judicial panel by involving more than one authority.
- Master calendar systems randomly assign trials, hearings and motions to judges so that judges have equal numbers of trials, hearings and pre-trial motions. However, cases vary in complexity and content. Some cases are simple and require little research on the part of judges and judicial clerks, while others require judges and clerks to spend hours in preparation for a hearing or days in preparation for a trial. As a result, a judge's dockets may be severely lighter or heavier than another judge's docket. Unequal distribution of caseload can interfere with the court's efficient management of cases.
previous post