|
article, or suffrage and elections? I still
do not understand. Am I to use the same
concept?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Chabot,
may the Chair point out that in the suffrage
and elections article there is provision that
the legislature may define "resident" for
the purposes of that article?
DELEGATE CHABOT: Yes, I recog-
nize that, and I was wondering whether
the intent of the Committee was to in-
corporate whatever that definition might be
into this article, or in effect permit a dif-
ferent definition of the same word in this
article?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd, do
you understand the question?
DELEGATE MUDD: I think I under-
stand the question, but I do not see how I
can answer what judicial or legislative in-
terpretation or definition may be given to
the word "resident."
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bennett.
DELEGATE BENNETT: Mr. Chair-
man, did you give consideration to the es-
tablishment of an administrative office to
serve the courts?
DELEGATE MUDD: Yes, I believe it
was the view of our Committee that such
would be necessary, incident to the admin-
istrative responsibilities that must be taken
over here.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bennett.
DELEGATE BENNETT: Is it your no-
tion that this would be done by rule?
DELEGATE MUDD: Yes.
DELEGATE BENNETT: Or would this
require action of the General Assembly?
DELEGATE MUDD: By rule.
THE CHAIRMAN: Present administra-
tive office is by statute, you understand,
Delegate Bennett?
DELEGATE BENNETT: I was won-
dering whether there was anything that
would preclude the General Assembly from
establishing such an office and giving it
certain responsibilities.
DELEGATE MUDD: Under this pro-
posal I would say that that would be within
the power of the courts, under its rule
making power. We did consider the possi-
bility of administrative agencies and an
administrative judge, but I think it is the
|
contemplation of this article that it would
be accomplished by rule making.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bennett.
DELEGATE BENNETT: Is it not true
that there is going to be a tremendous
amount of administrative work, particularly
during this period of reorganization?
DELEGATE MUDD: Yes.
DELEGATE BENNETT: Do you not
think something should be included spe-
cifically authorizing the establishment of
that office and authorizing the courts to
delegate certain powers to it?
DELEGATE MUDD: I think it would
be more appropriately a transistory provi-
sion.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Adkins.
DELEGATE ADKINS: I wonder if the
Chairman would try to define for me what
he means by the term "functional divi-
sion". Does it mean that the division of the
superior court may be established to func-
tion in any county, or does it have some
more limited meaning in the sense that a
court with limited powers within the su-
perior court in each county may be estab-
lished? Just precisely what is meant by
functional division, both in 5.08 and 5.10.
DELEGATE MUDD: The only differ-
ence I think that was intended in the two
provisions, Delegate Adkins, with respect
to functional divisions was that with re-
spect to the superior court, because there
is a superior court in every county. The
functional division would in all probability
be a county functional division, whereas
with respect to the district court it might
be a functional district to share the dis-
trict load.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd, I
do not believe your answer was responsive
to the question as the Chair understood it.
I understand the question directed to you
was whether the term "functional divi-
sions" as used in section 5.08, for instance,
meant a division of the superior court es-
tablished to perform a certain function.
DELEGATE MUDD: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Was that your ques-
tion, Delegate Adkins?
DELEGATE ADKINS: That is basically
it. In other words, the concept is that the
court will be established to perform a func-
tion less than the general jurisdiction of
other superior courts throughout the State.
|
