John Doerner
John Douglas
Gordon Griller
Ingo Keilitz
John Matthias
Brian Ostrom
Nial Raaen
William Raftery
David C. Steelman
Suzanne Tallarico
Richard Van Duizend
Larry Webster
While every state has a slightly different organizational scheme to their judicial system, all state courts are divided into four general categories or levels: trial courts of limited jurisdiction, trial courts of general jurisdiction, intermediate appellate courts, and courts of last resort. In an attempt to improve court administration at the structural level, major court reform efforts have taken place to unify administrative authority, centralize rulemaking powers, acquire unitary budgeting, and a consolidate state and local trial court funding.
Links to related online resources are listed below. Non-digitized publications may be borrowed from the NCSC Library; call numbers are provided.
Search the Gavel to Gavel legislation database based on state, year, legislation category, or any combination. Bill Type = "Structure Changes".
Detailed diagrams of each states' court system (US territories included)
A compilation of the National Association for Court Management's Justice Achievement Awards from 2000-2011.
The purpose of this study is to provide an objective analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of consolidating the limited jurisdiction courts in Mahoning County below the Court of Common Pleas level.
This book addresses many of the fundamental issues of state judiciaries and includes a section on the Court Reform Movement that investigates the historical context of court reformations, the unification of judiciaries, and the creation of judicial administrative offices.
This one hundred twenty-two page book highlights the National Interbranch Conference on Funding the State Courts.
Issues in trial court administration arising from an amendment to the Arkansas constitution that merged multiple trial courts into a two-tier system with one general-jurisdiction circuit court and one limited-jurisdiction district court.
Court Unification's contemporary value based on comparative research in trial courts of nine counties in five states. Court unification remains an essential tool for court reform, however other aspects are crucial as well and report mentions those in further detail.