Bar Assn. President Urges Action to End ‘Litigation Gridlock’ in the Civil Courts

In a letter to the district attorney, public defender and the presiding judge of the Superior Court, the new president of the Orange County Bar Assn. has called for a blue-ribbon commission to end what he called “litigation gridlock” in the civil courts.

Stuart T. Waldrip said in his letter, dated Jan. 8, that civil cases “have been pushed aside” in Orange County Superior Court since Dist. Atty. Cecil Hicks issued a prohibition in October against prosecutors discussing felony cases in judges’ chambers.

The letter was addressed to Hicks, Superior Court Judge Harmon G. Scoville and Public Defender Ronald Y. Butler.

Hicks’ policy against plea-bargaining behind closed doors has resulted in more criminal cases going to trial because many defense attorneys say they cannot ethically discuss plea-bargains in open court.

Prosecutor’s View

“We don’t see it as unrealistic,” Chief Assistant Dist. Atty. Michael R. Capizzi said. “The cases which can’t be discussed in open court are not that frequent.”

And, he added, “the public’s business is now going on in public.”

In his letter, however, Waldrip said the ultimate burden of the policy is borne by the public.

“Our people have a definite interest in trying those accused of crime and also have a definite interest in access to the legal system for the resolution of their civil disputes,” Waldrip wrote.

Waldrip, like other civil attorneys, remembers 1983, when the Superior Court civil case backlog hovered around 11,000 cases, giving Orange County the dubious honor of having one of the most congested civil court systems in California. For three years court administrators, judges and attorneys fought to bring the numbers down.

Backlog Reduced

By last summer, the backlog had been reduced to 6,000, making it possible to get a civil case to trial within two years of its filing.

While giving an acceptance speech for the prestigious Franklin G. West Award for advancing and elevating justice and the law, attorney Eugen C. Andres took a few minutes Wednesday to tell members of the Orange County Bar Assn. about “litigation gridlock.”

Since the district attorney’s office changed its plea-bargaining policy in October, he said, the backlog of civil cases has climbed from 6,000 to 7,000. Before the new plea-bargaining policy, 16 judges were hearing all criminal cases in Superior Court. That number has increased to 30 on some days.

Criminal cases take priority over civil lawsuits because of criminal defendants’ rights to a speedy trial, and the increase in the number of judges hearing criminal cases comes from the ranks of judges who otherwise would be hearing civil cases.

“I hope that those members of our legal family who have the power to resolve this problem do so immediately, so Orange County once again can be looked upon as a county that allows both criminal and civil litigants reasonable access to jury trial in Superior Court,” said Andres, a former president of the county bar association.

A Difficult Defense

Attorney Mark Edwards, past president of the Orange County Trial Lawyers Assn., said it is difficult to try to defend plea-bargaining because the public thinks it is bad.

“There is nothing farther from the truth,” he said, adding that if two experienced lawyers with a judge present can agree after an hour of discussion on a “predictable result” in a case that would otherwise take four trial days, the public comes out ahead.

A study of the Los Angeles Superior Court system shows that a criminal case--excluding the judge’s salary, which is paid by the state--can cost a county as much as $5,400 a day. This includes the costs of the jury, court reporters, witness fees, psychiatric evaluation, prosecutor’s salary and the public defender, if the suspect cannot afford a private attorney.

Waldrip contends that if some of the minor criminal cases could be settled by a plea-bargain in a judge’s chambers, it would save money.

To make his point, he noted the case of a man charged with stealing a bottle of whiskey worth $8.99 from a Stater Bros. store. A preliminary hearing was held in the case, and it was set for trial in January. It was estimated that the trial would take four days. The suspect, who was on probation for prior theft convictions when he allegedly shoplifted the liquor, finally pleaded guilty to the charge just before trial and received a one-year sentence in the Orange County Jail.

‘Sensible Resolution’

“We have to come to a sensible resolution on cases like this,” Waldrip said. “We can’t afford the luxury of spending $16,000 to try someone who steals a quart of liquor.

“It is our perception that there is a true crisis in the court system at this time,” Waldrip said. “Not only are criminal cases that would have gone to trial a few months ago now in danger of being dismissed, which would put accused and perhaps guilty persons back on the streets, but the civil litigants have been pushed aside to attempt to make room for the increased criminal trial load.”

Because of the lack of ways to immediately resolve the current problem, it will probably get worse before getting better. The increase in criminal trials calls for more judges, aggravating what is already seen as a shortage.

Superior Court Administrator Alan Slater said that, with last year’s caseload, the court was short 10 judges. This year, he estimated, that figure could increase to somewhere between 12 and 15.