Please cite to the original publication
Of late the impetus to procedural reform resulting from the interest created by the adoption in 1938 of the new federal rules of procedure has tended more and more to emphasize a re-examination of the basic court structure. This is a natural and a desirable trend. While pleading is a detail in judicial administration, a very important one in the light of our legal history, it still remains a detail. Its simplification will improve the administration of the particular court to which it applies; it will not unite into a single coherent scheme of businesslike character all the innumerable diverse, but overlapping and conflicting, tribunals so much a part of the American scene. Since the situation is usually at its worst with the so- called minor courts, the courts actually nearest the people, it is but natural that reform groups should busy themselves increasingly with this fundamental problem. And there is now at hand a solution, carefully thought through and widely supported by a rapidly increasing body of legal literature. It is the plan of the unified or integrated court, a single court of vary- ing departments under competent administrative direction. In 1949 the present writers had the opportunity, by virtue of a directive from a state government reorganization commission, to point out how the Connecticut lower courts exemplified the usual evils to a degree and to blueprint a plan of integration carrying the views of the experts to their logical conclusion. This article is therefore offered as an account of this venture and as, per- haps, a case study of at least a sober beginning to court reform in a state in real need of it.
Date of Authorship for this Version
Court Integration in Connecticut: A Case Study of Steps in Judicial Reform (with Elias Clark), 59 Yale Law Journal 1395 (1950)