A New Jersey Law Journal editorial published on Dec. 16, entitled “Jury Trial Innovation,” recommended that three innovations—providing juries with copies of the judge’s instructions on the law of the case, note taking by juries and allowing jurors to pose questions to witnesses—be “uniformly required.”
It also said that the Supreme Court “should always be open to, and through its committees, be in search of innovations that improve the quality of justice.” I applaud those views, but would suggest one further step: creation of a Supreme Court advisory committee charged with the specific responsibility of continually searching for potential innovations by examination of legal developments throughout the United States and beyond.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
