|
spect to the appointment and removal, if
my memory serves me correctly, with re-
spect to appointment, removal and tenure.
We used the term "judge" and did not
further define it to judge of the superior
court, Court of Appeals, district court, et
cetera. I think that would take care of the
problem.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate L. Taylor.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: Delegate
Johnson, you made a statement about labor
courts. Do you feel there might be a need
for a labor court in the. State of Maryland?
DELEGATE JOHNSON: I think that is
possible, but that certainly is alone not the
reason why we propose this. The truth of
the matter is we think it possible for a
number of other special courts that may
need to be created in the future. We cannot
predict. We have indicated some other spe-
cial courts, I believe labor court was one,
because that was a suggestion given to us.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: You said
that special courts like the labor court or
family court or combination of landlord-
tenant court would not be created under
this committee recommendation; is that
correct?
DELEGATE JOHNSON: No, we think
any administrative or quasi-judicial court
such as housing court or tax court as we
have it now, or Workmen's Compensation
Commission, in our view could probably be
continued.
However, we cannot predict future needs
wherein it may be that some of the quasi-
judicial courts or administrative courts as
we know them today, may need to become
courts of record, actually part of our ju-
dicial system. The only thing we suggest,
and as provided in thirty other state con-
stitutions, is that the legislature in its wis-
dom and to promote flexibility should be
permitted to create other courts, if any,
as needed.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Taylor.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: .You were
saying the committee recommendation is
not geared to the future court needs of the
people of the State.
DELEGATE JOHNSON: No, I would
not put it in that term. I think that it is
just not flexible enough. I think the ma-
jority members feel that by providing for
functional differentials they will take care
of whatever problem may develop. The mi-
nority feels this may or may not be the
|
case and just by adding a couple words we
could provide for future generations for
the creation of other special courts.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Cicone.
DELEGATE CICONE: Mr. Johnson,
would the judiciary not be in a much better
position to know what courts are needed
by their functional divisions than the legis-
lature? Could the legislature not be pres-
sured by certain areas to create certain
courts. We might get into the area we have
already with various courts being created
perhaps where they are not needed or
needed in a smaller degree. Could this not
be taken care of by the functional divi-
sions instead?
DELEGATE JOHNSON: I will try to
answer your question this way: Functional
divisions will certainly take care of any
problem wherein the jurisdiction is the
same.
I might comment a bit on this because
there was a lot of discussion concerning the
functional divisions of the superior court
and the district court. I might say that the
reason that we provided for functional divi-
sions was to permit some flexibility in par-
ticularly urban areas where it would be
important in the Committee's view to have
a civil jurisdiction and a criminal jurisdic-
tion. As you know as a member of our
Committee this amendment was submitted
by a member of the minority.
You can do that in Baltimore City and
some other urban areas but you need not
do that perhaps in Talbot County or some
other small county.
DELEGATE JOHNSON: So although
you can answer part of the problem by
functional- division, in our view you could
not take care of the possibility of the need
for creation of a tax court unless you pro-
vided for tax court jurisdiction in every
district court or superior court in the State.
That would be the same way with the court
of claims. It would be the same way with
a labor court, because if you are going to
have a uniform judicial court system, then
the jurisdiction has to be uniform.
We are in favor of that, but we think
that these special courts ought to be pro-
vided for if they are needed and that we
should not tie the legislature's hands in
creating them if the need arises.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Hargrove.
DELEGATE HARGROVE: Delegate
Johnson, by removing the word "exclu-
sively" from section 5.01, can you tell me
|
