The Superior Court of New Hampshire will halt jury trials due to budget problems.
John Broderick, the state’s chief justice, said suspending trials was essential to avoid layoffs in the judicial system, which has already cut $2.7 million from its budget.
The measure will save about $73,000, the monthly amount spent on stipends for jurors. But the head of an association representing civil trial lawyers said it could have a harsh impact on plaintiffs, many of whom have already waited years for a judgment in their case.
Ellen Shemitz, executive director of the New Hampshire Association for Justice, asks “What are they going to rely on in the interim?”
This is what happens when you rely on the state to “provide” “justice” (scare quotes warranted!). Furthermore, I can’t imagine that in a free society the various providers of legal services (conflict resolution, defense agencies, arbitration and mediation, patrol and restitution, etc.) would take endless years to solve disputes.
So who can the people of NH rely on? Legally, possibly no one. Even private arbitration and mediation is regulated (and I believe non-binding from the point of view of the state). Either way, this shows that the state is inefficient even when it comes to the things it “should” do. Reject monopoly.11:09 am on December 10, 2008 Email Manuel Lora