Federal Judiciary: Information on the Use of Recalled Magistrate and
Bankruptcy Judges (Letter Report, 01/15/99, GAO/GGD-99-22).

This report discusses the federal judiciary's use of recalled magistrate
judges and bankruptcy judges. These individuals are retired magistrate
and bankruptcy judges who, with their consent, return to the bench for a
specified period of time. The use of recalled judges is one option
district courts and bankruptcy courts have for obtaining temporary
judicial assistance when they are experiencing a temporary workload
increase, have one or more judgeship vacancies, or for other reasons.
This report discusses (1) whether the demand for recalled magistrate and
bankruptcy judges has exceeded the number of judges available to serve
in recalled positions, (2) whether the courts that recalled judges had
judgeship vacancies and higher-than-average weighted case filings, and
(3) the approximate one-year cost savings associated with using a
recalled judge rather than filling a full-time judgeship position.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  GGD-99-22
     TITLE:  Federal Judiciary: Information on the Use of Recalled 
             Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges
      DATE:  01/15/99
   SUBJECT:  Statistical data
             Federal courts
             Bankruptcy
             Judges
             Comparative analysis
             Cost effectiveness analysis
             Productivity in government

             
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO report.  This text was extracted from a PDF file.        **
** Delineations within the text indicating chapter titles,      **
** headings, and bullets have not been preserved, and in some   **
** cases heading text has been incorrectly merged into          **
** body text in the adjacent column.  Graphic images have       **
** not been reproduced, but figure captions are included.       **
** Tables are included, but column deliniations have not been   **
** preserved.                                                   **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
**                                                              **
**                                            **
**                                                              **
** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
******************************************************************
gg99022 FEDERAL JUDICIARY Information on the Use of Recalled
Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges

United States General Accounting Office

GAO Report to the Honorable Jack Reed, U. S. Senate


January 1999 

GAO/GGD-99-22

January 1999   GAO/GGD-99-22

United States General Accounting Office Washington, D. C. 20548

General Government Division

B-280364

Page 1 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

GAO January 15, 1999 Honorable Jack Reed United States Senate

Dear Senator Reed: As you requested, this report discusses the
federal judiciary's use of recalled magistrate judges and
bankruptcy judges. Recalled judges are retired magistrate and
bankruptcy judges who, with their consent, return to judicial
duties for a specified period of time. The use of recalled judges
is one option district courts and bankruptcy courts have for
obtaining temporary judicial assistance when they are experiencing
a temporary workload increase, have one or more judgeship
vacancies, or for other reasons. 1

Specifically, as agreed with your office, our objectives were to
determine (1) whether the demand for recalled magistrate and
bankruptcy judges has exceeded the number of judges available to
serve in recalled positions, (2) whether the courts that recalled
judges had judgeship vacancies and/ or higher than average
weighted case filings, 2 and (3) the approximate 1- year cost
savings associated with using a recalled judge rather than filling
a fulltime judgeship position.

During the period from October 1, 1989, through April 30, 1998,
all of the district courts and all but one of the bankruptcy
courts whose requests for recalled judges had been approved by the
circuit judicial councils 3 were able to obtain the services of a
recalled judge. 4 During this period, 25 of the

1 The courts can also use visiting judges from other districts.
Visiting judges are usually active (nonretired) judges from other
courts who are assigned to provide assistance to a requesting
court for a specified period of time. Visiting judges may be from
within the same judicial circuit as the requesting court
(intracircuit assignments) or from outside the judicial circuit
(intercircuit assignments). District courts and bankruptcy courts
are organized in 12 geographic circuits whose boundaries are
defined by statute. There is also a court of appeals for the
federal circuit, but this circuit has no role in magistrate and
bankruptcy judge recalls.

2 Weighted case filings represent a measure of the average amount
of judicial time that a district or bankruptcy court's filings may
require. 3 Each circuit has a Judicial Council of the Circuit that
is statutorily charged with making all necessary and appropriate
orders for the effective and expeditious administration of justice
within the circuit. The council consists of equal numbers of
active court of appeals judges and active district court judges
within the circuit, plus the chief judge of the circuit, who is
the presiding officer.

4 Administrative Office of the U. S. Court's (AOUSC) data excluded
recall appointments made on or after October 1 that expired prior
to September 30 in each fiscal year, from 1990 to 1997. AOUSC's
data also excluded any recall appointments made on or after
October 1, 1997, that expired prior to April 30, 1998. Thus, these
data may have excluded some short- term appointments that expired
prior to the end Results in Brief

B-280364 Page 2 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

92 district courts with magistrate judges and 33 of the 90
bankruptcy courts used at least 1 retired magistrate or bankruptcy
judge. The single bankruptcy court whose approved request was not
filled had requested the appointment of two recalled bankruptcy
judges in 1993. One appointment was made, and data were not
available on why the second appointment was not made. One possible
reason is that Congress had authorized two additional bankruptcy
judgeships for this court in 1992.

In considering whether the demand for recalled judges exceeded the
number of judges available to serve in recall appointments, it is
important to note that the 111 recalled magistrate judge
appointments and the 159 recalled bankruptcy judge appointments
were filled by a relatively small number of eligible judges who
were often reappointed to their recalled positions one or more
times. A total of 96 magistrate judges and 60 bankruptcy judges
were eligible for recall for at least part of the period covered
by our review. The recall appointments were filled by 33 separate
retired magistrate judges and 43 separate retired bankruptcy
judges.

District courts or bankruptcy courts that recalled judges showed
no clear pattern of judgeship vacancies, and bankruptcy courts
that recalled judges showed no clear pattern of weighted case
filings. Some district courts or bankruptcy courts used recalled
judges for at least a portion of the time the court had a
magistrate judgeship or bankruptcy judgeship vacancy, while other
district courts or bankruptcy courts with magistrate judgeship or
bankruptcy judgeship vacancies did not use recalled judges.

The bankruptcy courts that used recalled judges during the period
of our review had widely varying weighted case filings. For those
bankruptcy courts that recalled bankruptcy judges, the weighted
case filings ranged from 619 to 2,144 per bankruptcy judgeship in
fiscal year 1992 and from 639 to 2,321 in fiscal year 1997.
National average weighted filings per bankruptcy judgeship were
1,437 in fiscal year 1992 and 1,436 in fiscal year 1997.

The Judicial Conference has not adopted case weight measures for
magistrate judges. However, at your request, we are providing
information on district court weighted case filings, which were
developed to measure the case filings workload of district judges,
not magistrate judges.

of the fiscal year. However, both AOUSC officials and the circuit
executives we interviewed said the data we received would have
excluded few recalls because there have been few recall
appointments of less than 1 year.

B-280364 Page 3 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

According to Administrative Office of the U. S. Courts (AOUSC)
data, recalled magistrate and bankruptcy judges are less costly
than full- time nonretired judges. The estimated fiscal year 1999
annual recurring cost of a full- time nonretired magistrate judge
is about $602,000, and the cost of a full- time bankruptcy judge
is about $575,000. These costs include the salaries and benefits
of the judge and his or her support staff, space, equipment, and
facilities. In contrast, AOUSC data indicated that the average
annual cost of a recalled magistrate judge ranged from about
$87,000 to about $253,000. The average annual cost of a recalled
bankruptcy judge ranged from about $93,000 to about $241,000. The
lower cost figures represent the average annual cost of a recalled
magistrate or bankruptcy judge who retired at full salary and
whose sole personal staff is a full- time secretary. The higher
cost figures represent a recalled magistrate or bankruptcy judge
who did not retire at full salary, earns about $32,000 annually
while on recall, and has a full staff.

Ninety- two of the 94 federal district courts include district
court judges and magistrate judges. 5 District court judges
generally are appointed for life 6 and exercise the full range of
judicial authority vested in the district courts. Magistrate
judges are appointed for a fixed term of years to either full- or
part- time positions. 7 Magistrate judges exercise the judicial
duties permissible by statute and the Constitution that the
district courts delegate to them. Generally, a district court
assigns magistrate judges all misdemeanor criminal cases 8 and the
conduct of preliminary proceedings in felony criminal cases. 9 In
civil cases, magistrate judges may also supervise pretrial
proceedings. In addition, with the consent of the parties in the
case, magistrate judges may preside over all phases of a civil
suit, including trial, and render a decision in the case.

5 The district courts in the U. S. territories of Guam and the
Northern Mariana Islands do not have magistrate judges. 6 Judges
appointed to the district courts in the U. S. territories of Guam,
the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Virgin Islands are appointed
for 10- year terms. 7 Full- time magistrate judges are appointed
for 8- year terms and part- time magistrate judges for 4- year
terms. 8 Generally, those federal crimes that carry a maximum
penalty of imprisonment of 1 year or less.

9 Generally, those federal crimes that carry a maximum penalty of
imprisonment of more than 1 year. Background

B-280364 Page 4 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

With some exceptions, the 90 federal bankruptcy courts preside
over all bankruptcy cases filed in the United States. 10
Bankruptcy judges are appointed for 14- year terms and are
appointed only to full- time positions.

Eligible retired magistrate and bankruptcy judges may be recalled
to judicial service with their consent. With a few exceptions, all
retired magistrate and bankruptcy judges are eligible for recall.
Retired magistrate and bankruptcy judges who receive an annuity
under the Judicial Retirement System (JRS) and elect to practice
law are not eligible for recall. Retired magistrate judges who did
not retire under JRS, and have elected to practice law after
retirement, may continue to practice law if recalled for part-
time service, but they may not continue to practice law if
recalled to full- time service.

The decision to seek the appointment of a recalled judge rests
with the district court or bankruptcy court that determines it
needs the services of a recalled judge. The circuit judicial
council must approve the request, specify the calendar period of
the recall, specify whether the appointment is for full- time or
part- time service, and determine the personal support staff, if
any, that the recalled judge may have. Additional information on
the recall process can be found in appendix I.

Recalled judges are paid a salary that represents the difference
between their retirement pensions and the full salary of the
office to which they were recalled. For example, a bankruptcy
judge who retired in fiscal year 1998 with a pension of $80,000
and was recalled to full- time service in the same fiscal year
would receive annual wages of $45,764. This is the difference
between the judge's pension and the $125,764 fiscal year 1998
salary of an active bankruptcy judge. A recalled judge who had
retired at full salary would receive no additional compensation
for recall service. Appendix II provides additional information on
the conditions and compensation of recall judges.

Our objectives were to determine (1) whether the demand for
recalled magistrate and bankruptcy judges has exceeded the number
of judges available to serve in recalled positions, (2) whether
the district and bankruptcy courts that recalled judges had
judgeship vacancies and/ or higher than average weighted case
filings, and (3) the approximate 1- year cost savings associated
with using a recalled judge rather than filling a full

10 By statute, the district courts retain original jurisdiction
over bankruptcy cases. However, with few exceptions, the district
courts have adopted a policy of referring all bankruptcy matters
to the bankruptcy courts within their respective districts. Scope
and

Methodology

B-280364 Page 5 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

time judgeship position. Our review covered the use of recalled
magistrate and bankruptcy judges during the period October 1,
1989, through April 30, 1998. We obtained most of the data needed
to address our objectives through AOUSC. We requested data by
district on the number of retired and recalled magistrate judges
and bankruptcy judges, including data by district on the number of
retired magistrate and bankruptcy judges who were eligible for
recall each year and the number of eligible judges who were
actually recalled each year. We reviewed the data AOUSC provided
for internal consistency by choosing a judgmental sample of
retired and recalled judges, tracing the data back to source
documents, and verifying that the data provided matched the data
in the source documents. Our judgmental sample included retired
and recalled judges from different fiscal years and geographically
dispersed district and bankruptcy courts.

We requested data for the same period for magistrate and
bankruptcy judgeship vacancies in those district and bankruptcy
courts that recalled judges. We requested the weighted case
filings of the 94 district courts and 90 bankruptcy courts for
fiscal years 1990 through 1997.

We obtained written comments on a draft of this report from AOUSC.
These comments are discussed at the end of this letter and are
reprinted in appendix VI .

Our work was performed from May 1998 to December 1998 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Our objectives, scope, and methodology are described in more
detail in appendix III.

A minority of district and bankruptcy courts used recalled judges
during the period covered by our review (October 1, 1989, through
April 30, 1998). During this period, 11 25 of the 92 district
courts with magistrate judges (27.2 percent) and 33 of the 90
bankruptcy courts (36.7 percent) recalled at least 1 judge (see
figs. 1 and 2). However, at least 1 district court and 1
bankruptcy court in each of the 12 regional circuits had recalled
a judge during this period.

11 Data on recalled judges are as of September 30 for fiscal years
1990 through 1997, and April 30, 1998, for fiscal year 1998. Data
on the Use of

Recalled Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges

B-280364 Page 6 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

WA OR

NV AZ CA

C S

W W

N S

E W W

W W

W W

W W W

W W W M

M M

E E

E NY- E

E E E

E E E

M M M

M E

S S S S

S S

S S

S C

S N

N N N N N

N N N

N N

E E

N W E

ID MT

WY UT

CO NM

TX MS AL SC

MD CT

NC VA

WV TN KY

OH PA NJ DE Virgin

Islands Puerto

Rico D. C. Circuit

Federal Circuit

Districts that recalled at least one magistrate judge C, M, N, W,
S, E = State districts

MI NY

MA RI NH

ME VT ND

SD NE

MN IA MO

AR IN IL

WI GA

FL LA HI AK

Guam Northern Mariana Islands

KS OK 9 8

7 10 9

5 11

4 6

2 1

3

Note: C = central; M = middle; N = northern; W = western; S =
southern; E = eastern Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC data.

Figure 1: Twenty Five District Courts, by Circuit, That Had a
Recalled Magistrate Judge on Duty at the End of One or More Fiscal
Years, 1990- 1997, or as of April 30 1998

B-280364 Page 7 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

WA OR

NV AZ CA

C S

W W

N S

E W W

W W

W W

W W W

W W W M

M M

E E

E NY- E

E E E

E E E

M M M

M E

S S S S

S S

S S

S C

S N

N N N N N

N N N

N N

E E

N W E

ID MT

WY UT

CO NM

TX MS AL SC

MD CT

NC VA

WV TN KY

OH PA NJ DE Virgin

Islands Puerto

Rico D. C. Circuit

Federal Circuit

Districts that recalled at least one bankruptcy judge C, M, N, W,
S, E = State districts

MI NY

MA RI NH

ME VT ND

SD NE

MN IA MO

AR IN IL

WI GA

FL LA HI AK

Guam Northern Mariana Islands

KS OK 9 8

7 10 9

5 11

4 6

2 1

3

Note: C = central; M = middle; N = northern; W = western; S =
southern; E = eastern Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC data.

Figure 2: Thirty- Three Bankruptcy Courts, by Circuit, That Had a
Recalled Bankruptcy Judge on Duty at the End of One or More Fiscal
Years, 1990- 1997, or as of April 30, 1998

B-280364 Page 8 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

The 25 district courts that recalled magistrate judges appointed
eligible judges to a total of 111 magistrate judge recall
positions. The 33 bankruptcy courts had a total 159 bankruptcy
judge recall appointments. All of the district courts and all but
one of the bankruptcy courts whose requests for recalled judges
had been approved during this period were able to obtain the
services of a recalled judge. In 1993, the circuit council had
approved two bankruptcy judge recall appointments for one
bankruptcy court, but only one appointment was made. Data were not
available on why the second appointment was not made. One possible
reason is that Congress had authorized two additional bankruptcy
court judgeships for this court in 1992.

The total number of recalled magistrate judge appointments by a
single district over the entire period ranged from 1 to 12. The
number of district courts with one or more recalled magistrate
judges on duty at the end of the fiscal year increased annually,
from 4 in fiscal year 1990 to 16 in fiscal year 1997. The number
of recalled magistrate judges on duty at the end of the fiscal
year also grew each year (except for 1997). Data by fiscal year
and district are shown in appendix IV, table IV. 1.

The total number of recalled bankruptcy judge appointments by a
single bankruptcy court over the period ranged from 1 to 9. The
number of bankruptcy courts with recalled judges on duty at the
end of the fiscal year ranged from 10 (fiscal years 1990, 1991,
and 1993) to 25 (as of April 30 in fiscal year 1998). The number
of recalled bankruptcy judges on duty at the end of the fiscal
year more than doubled by the end of fiscal year 1994 (to 23) from
the levels it had been in fiscal years 1990, 1991, and 1993. Since
the end of fiscal year 1994, the number of recalled bankruptcy
judges has remained relatively stable. Additional details are
shown in appendix IV, table IV. 2.

Since fiscal year 1990, the number of retired magistrate and
bankruptcy judges and the number of those retired judges who were
eligible for recall has grown annually. Each fiscal year during
the period covered by our review, at least 80 percent of retired
magistrate judges were eligible for recall. In all but 2 fiscal
years, 100 percent of retired bankruptcy judges were eligible for
recall. For each year covered by our data, the number of
magistrate and bankruptcy judges eligible for recall has exceeded
the number of judges actually recalled. It must be noted, however,
that eligible retired judges may be recalled only with their
consent, and not all eligible judges may be willing to accept a
recall appointment. The percentage of eligible retired magistrate
judges who were recalled ranged from about 16 percent at the end
of fiscal year 1992 to about 24 percent at the end of Number of
Eligible Retired

Judges Has Exceeded the Number Who Were Recalled

B-280364 Page 9 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

fiscal year 1996 (see table 1). The percentage of eligible retired
bankruptcy judges who were recalled ranged from about 33 percent
at the end of fiscal year 1993 to about 56 percent at the end of
fiscal year 1990 (see table 2). The number of bankruptcy courts
that recalled bankruptcy judges jumped sharply in fiscal year 1994
and has remained relatively stable since then.

Number of Percentage a of

Date Judges in retirement status Retired judges

eligible for recall Eligible judges recalled Retired judges

eligible for recall Retired judges recalled

Number of districts that recalled judges

09- 30- 90 23 19 4 83 21 4 09- 30- 91 37 30 6 81 20 6 09- 30- 92
51 44 7 86 16 7 09- 30- 93 57 49 9 86 18 9 09- 30- 94 71 60 13 85
22 11 09- 30- 95 87 73 16 84 22 12 09- 30- 96 100 83 20 83 24 15
09- 30- 97 112 92 18 82 20 16 04- 30- 98 119 96 18 81 19 14

a Rounded to nearest whole number. Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC
data.

Number of Percentage a of

Date Judges in retirement status Retired judges

eligible for recall Eligible judges recalled Retired judges

eligible for recall Retired judges recalled

Number of districts that recalled judges

09- 30- 90 18 18 10 100 56 10 09- 30- 91 22 22 10 100 46 10 09-
30- 92 27 27 12 100 44 11 09- 30- 93 35 33 11 94 33 10 09- 30- 94
42 42 23 100 55 21 09- 30- 95 47 47 24 100 51 22 09- 30- 96 50 50
22 100 44 21 09- 30- 97 55 55 22 100 40 22 04- 30- 98 61 60 25 98
42 25

a Rounded to nearest whole number. Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC
data.

Table 1: Magistrate Judges in Retirement Status, Eligible for
Recall, and Actually Recalled; and Number of Districts That
Recalled Judges, as of September 30, 1990- 1997, and April 30,
1998

Table 2: Bankruptcy Judges in Retirement Status, Eligible for
Recall, and Actually Recalled; and Number of Courts That Recalled
Judges, as of September 30, 1990- 1997, and April 30, 1998

B-280364 Page 10 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

The majority of recalled magistrate and bankruptcy judges have
served annual (ad hoc) terms rather than extended recall terms
(which are generally 3- year appointments). 12 Further, the
majority of the judges who were recalled served more than one
term. As a result, the number of recalled judge appointments
exceeded the number of retired judges who filled these
appointments. The 111 recalled magistrate judge appointments were
filled by 33 separate retired magistrate judges. The 159 recalled
bankruptcy judge appointments were filled by 43 separate retired
bankruptcy judges.

Analysis of the data by fiscal year shows that a majority of
recalled judges served more than one annual appointment. For
example, of the 18 retired magistrate judges who were serving
recall duty on September 30, 1997, 17 were serving on an ad hoc
basis, and 13 of the 18 recalled judges had also served in the
previous year. Of the 22 retired bankruptcy judges who were
serving recall duty on the same date, 17 were serving on an ad hoc
basis, and 20 of the 22 recalled judges had also served in the
previous year. (For details by fiscal year, see app. IV, tables
IV. 3 and IV. 4.)

District and bankruptcy courts may request a recalled judge for a
variety of reasons, such as temporarily high case filings,
judgeship vacancies, or the illness of an active judge that
temporarily reduces his or her ability to carry a full caseload.
AOUSC officials and circuit executives noted that temporarily high
case filings and judgeship vacancies were the two most common
reasons for requesting recalled judges. Our analysis of AOUSC's
data showed that some courts had judgeship vacancies and/ or
weighted case filings above the national average at the same time
that they had a recalled judge. However, we found no clear pattern
with regard to judgeship vacancies or weighted case filings among
those courts that used recalled judges.

We spoke with the circuit executives or their representatives in
the 12 regional judicial circuits concerning the use of recalled
magistrate and bankruptcy judges. 13 Overall, these officials told
us that the circuits neither encourage nor discourage the use of
recalled judges. Rather, the circuit councils generally review
each request for a recalled judge on a case- bycase basis in light
of the Judicial Conference's guidelines and regulations on the use
of recalled judges and any circuit standards. Generally the

12 To be eligible for an extended recall appointment, a magistrate
or bankruptcy judge must be at least age 65 and have retired under
JRS including hybrid JRS. See app. II. 13 There is also a court of
appeals for the federal circuit, but this circuit has no district
or bankruptcy courts. The Majority of Recalled

Judges Have Served Multiple Recall Terms

Reasons for Using Recalled Judges Varied

Comments of Circuit Executives on Recalled Judge Appointments

B-280364 Page 11 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

circuits have no written criteria, in addition to those of the
Judicial Conference, for reviewing recalled judge requests. Two
circuits had drafted general guidelines for recalled appointments,
and the First Circuit required the requesting district to fill out
an information sheet justifying its recall request.

Documentation the circuit executives provided showed that since
1990 appointments were made for all approved requests for recalled
judges, with one exception. An appointment was not made for one
approved recalled bankruptcy judge request. The bankruptcy court
whose recall appointment was not made had requested the
appointment of two recalled judges in 1993. The circuit council
approved the court's request for both appointments, but only one
recalled judge was actually appointed. Data were not available on
why this second approved position was not filled. One possible
reason is that Congress had authorized two additional bankruptcy
judgeships for this court in 1992.

The circuit executives stated that few recalled judges are
recalled for terms of less than 1 year and that some circuits have
a general policy that appointments must be for at least 1 year.
However, the officials noted that in most cases the circuits first
consider the use of active judges from within and then outside the
circuit (that is, intracircuit and intercircuit assignments)
before requesting the assistance of recalled judges. The
executives also said that when assistance from active judges is
not available, recalled judges offer experienced assistance.

Based on data provided by AOUSC, we found no clear pattern in
judgeship vacancies among the district and bankruptcy courts that
used recalled judges (see table 3). For example, of the 25
districts that recalled at least 1 magistrate judge during the
period covered in our review, 10 recalled a magistrate judge
during the same period that they experienced judgeship vacancies.
Further, of the 25 districts that recalled at least 1 magistrate
judge during the period of our review, 8 experienced judgeship
vacancies but did not recall a magistrate judge during the time
the vacancies existed. Four district courts appointed recalled
magistrate judges when the court had both a judgeship vacancy and
weighted case filings above the national average. No Clear Pattern
Between

Judgeship Vacancies and the Use of Recalled Judges

B-280364 Page 12 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Magistrate Judges Bankruptcy Judges Date

Number of districts that recalled judges

Number of districts with judgeship

vacancies Number of courts

that recalled judges

Number of courts with judgeship

vacancies 09- 30- 90 4 0 10 2 09- 30- 91 6 0 10 4 09- 30- 92 7 0
11 6 09- 30- 93 9 2 10 8 09- 30- 94 11 2 21 11 09- 30- 95 12 1 22
8 09- 30- 96 15 2 21 11 09- 30- 97 16 2 22 11 04- 30- 98 14 1 25
10

Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC data.

The data were similar for bankruptcy judges. For example, of the
33 districts that recalled at least 1 bankruptcy judge during the
period covered in our review, only 15 recalled a bankruptcy judge
during the same period they experienced the judgeship vacancies.
Further, of the 33 districts that recalled at least 1 bankruptcy
judge during the period of our review, 22 experienced judgeship
vacancies but did not recall a bankruptcy judge during the time
the vacancies existed. 14 Thirteen bankruptcy courts had
bankruptcy judgeship vacancies at the same time the courts had one
or more recalled judges. Six of these courts had both a bankruptcy
judgeship vacancy and weighted case filings above the national
average in at least one fiscal year in which the court recalled a
bankruptcy judge.

Based on our analysis of AOUSC's data on recalled bankruptcy
judges and bankruptcy courts' weighted case filings, 15 we found
no clear pattern of weighted case filings among those bankruptcy
courts that recalled judges during the period of our review. While
some bankruptcy courts with comparatively high weighted case
filings recalled judges, other bankruptcy courts with similarly
high weighted case filings did not. Alternatively, a number of
bankruptcy courts with comparatively low weighted case filings
used recalled bankruptcy judges on a consistent basis. Although we
have provided the district court weighted case filings in this
report for informational purposes, it is not clear, for the
reasons discussed below,

14 These categories are not mutually exclusive. Four districts
recalled a bankruptcy judge in one year when the district had a
judgeship vacancy but did not in another year that it had a
judgeship vacancy. 15 Weighted case filings were not available for
fiscal years 1990, 1991, and 1993 for bankruptcy courts. Although
weighted case filings for these years were available for
statistical years ending June 30 and calendar years ending
December 31, we did not use these data because they would not be
comparable to the fiscal year data provided for other years.

Table 3: Number of District and Bankruptcy Courts That Had
Recalled Judges, and the Number of Judgeship Vacancies in These
Courts, as of September 30, 1990- 1997, and April 30, 1998

Weighted Case Filings of Courts that Recalled Bankruptcy Judges
Varied Widely

B-280364 Page 13 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

what, if any, relationship exists between these weighted case
filings and magistrate judge workload.

The Judicial Conference has adopted weighted case filings measures
for both district and bankruptcy courts. Weighted case filings
represent a measure of the relative amount of judge time that a
district or bankruptcy court's case filings may require. It is
useful to remember that the case weights for both district and
bankruptcy courts represent averages, and the actual amount of
judge time required for any specific mix of cases may vary from
court to court. In assessing district judge or bankruptcy judge
workload, the Judicial Conference uses weighted case filings per
authorized judgeship. Authorized judgeships are the number of
district or bankruptcy judgeships authorized by statute. To
determine a bankruptcy or district court's weighted case filings
per authorized judgeship, the court's total weighted filings are
divided by its number of authorized judgeships. For example, a
district with 4,000 weighted filings and 10 authorized judgeships
would have 400 weighted filings per authorized judgeship.

Bankruptcy court weighted case filings were developed to measure
the workload of bankruptcy judges. The average weighted case
filings for those bankruptcy courts that recalled bankruptcy
judges varied among the districts each year and across the years
covered by our review. For example, the weighted case filings of
courts that recalled bankruptcy judges ranged from 619 to 2,144
per bankruptcy court judgeship in fiscal year 1992 and from 639 to
2,321 in fiscal year 1997 (see table 4). The average among all 90
bankruptcy courts was 1,437 in 1992 and 1,436 in 1997. (See app.
V, table V. 2, for details on weighted case filings, by bankruptcy
district, for each fiscal year.)

Range of weighted case filings Fiscal year a Number of districts

recalling judges Low district High district National average

1992 11 619 2,144 1,437 1994 21 507 2,084 1,227 1995 22 536 1,843
1,149 1996 21 544 1,729 1,272 1997 22 639 2,321 1,436 a Weighted
case filings not available for fiscal years 1990, 1991, and 1993.

Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC data.

Bankruptcy courts' weighted case filings varied widely

Table 4: Range of Weighted Case Filings for Those Bankruptcy
Courts That Recalled Judges Compared to National Average, Fiscal
Years 1992 and 1994- 1997

B-280364 Page 14 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

The district court case weights measure the workload of district
court judges, not magistrate judges. The Conference has not
adopted a weighted workload measure for magistrate judges. To the
extent that the work of magistrate judges reduced the time that
district judges must spend on specific types of cases, the
reduction in district judge time would be reflected in the
district court case weights for those types of cases. Some types
of cases, such as criminal misdemeanors, which are commonly
decided by magistrate judges, are not reflected in the district
court case weights at all.

The average weighted case filings for those districts that
recalled magistrate judges varied among the districts each year
and across the years covered by our review. For information
purposes, the high and low ranges, plus the national average
weighted case filings are shown in table 5. (See app. V, table V.
1, for details on weighted case filings, by district, for each
fiscal year. However, it is not clear what use these data may have
in assessing magistrate judge workload.

Range of weighted case filings Fiscal year Number of districts

recalling judges Low district High district National average

1990 4 412 695 427 1991 6 338 507 386 1992 7 356 506 412 1993 9
382 522 419 1994 11 377 560 419 1995 12 264 585 448 1996 15 298
651 472 1997 16 259 1,649 519 Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC data.

Although the cost of using a recalled judge is less than the cost
of a fulltime active magistrate or bankruptcy judge, the actual
cost of any particular recall appointment depends upon a number of
variables. These include (1) whether the recalled judge retired at
full or partial salary, (2) the pension plan under which the judge
retired, (3) the staff support provided to the judge, and (4)
whether the judge is required to travel from his or her home to
the court in which the recall service is performed.

Judges who retired at full salary are not entitled to additional
pay for recall service. Judges who retired at less than full
salary are entitled to a salary (or daily wage for those
performing part- time service) that equals the difference between
their pensions and the salary of an active, full- time judge. (See
app. II for more details.) Judges who retired under the Civil
Service Retirement System (CSRS) or the Federal Employee
Retirement District court weighted case

filings not designed to measure magistrate judge workload

Table 5: Range of Weighted Case Filings for Those Districts That
Recalled Magistrate Judges Compared to National Average, Fiscal
Years 1990- 1997

A Number of Variables Affect Actual Cost Savings Associated with
Recalled Judges

B-280364 Page 15 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

System (FERS) may be entitled to a supplemental annuity while on
recall duty. Recalled judges who have limited support staff, such
as a secretary only, cost less than those recalled judges
receiving the same pension who have the same support staff as a
full- time active judge. Recalled judges are entitled to the same
travel and per diem expenses as active judges. Thus, if a judge
must travel from his or her home to the district to which he or
she was recalled, the district that recalled the judge may incur
travel and per diem expenses for his or her services.

The majority of magistrate judges who were eligible for recall
each year had retired at less than full salary. 16 For every
fiscal year from 1990 through 1996, the number of magistrate
judges who had retired at less than full salary was at least
double the number of judges who had retired at full salary (see
app. IV, table IV. 5). This was not true of bankruptcy judges.
Beginning in fiscal year 1993, a majority of eligible, retired
bankruptcy judges had retired at full salary; and, beginning in
fiscal year 1994, a majority of recalled bankruptcy judges had
retired at full salary (see app. IV, table IV. 6).

Unlike their colleagues who retired at full salary, magistrate and
bankruptcy judges whose pensions are less than the full salary of
the office from which they retired have a financial incentive to
serve on recall duty because they would be paid the difference
between the amount of their pensions and the current salary of an
active magistrate or bankruptcy judge. Consequently, it is
generally less expensive for the circuit councils and district
courts to recall magistrate or bankruptcy judges who had retired
at full salary than to recall magistrate or bankruptcy judges who
had retired at less than full salary. From fiscal years 1991
through 1997, the percentage of eligible magistrate judges who had
retired on full salary and were recalled ranged from 23 percent
(1993) to 44 percent (1996). During this same period, no more than
19 percent (in 1991) of eligible magistrate judges who retired at
less than full salary were recalled (see app. IV, table IV. 5).
The picture for bankruptcy judges is mixed. From fiscal years 1991
through 1994, bankruptcy judges who retired at less than full
salary were more likely to be recalled than those who had retired
at full salary. Beginning in fiscal year 1995, judges who retired
at full salary have been more likely to be recalled. (See app. IV,
table IV. 6) This may reflect the fact that, beginning in 1994, a
majority of eligible retired bankruptcy judges had retired at full
salary.

16 Only judges who have qualified for retirement under JRS may
retire at full salary. Recalled Magistrate Judges

Generally Retired at Less Than Full Salary; Bankruptcy Judge Data
Mixed

B-280364 Page 16 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Magistrate and bankruptcy judges who retired under either CSRS or
FERS may qualify for an enhanced retirement pension as a result of
recall service. Such retired judges with at least 1 but less than
5 years of full- time continuous recall service may receive a
supplemental annuity. Judges with 5 or more years of continuous
full- time recall service may have their pensions recalculated
based on a new average salary. Of the 33 separate magistrate
judges who were recalled during the period of our review, 9 (27
percent) had retired under CSRS or FERS, and 1 had served 5 or
more years of recall service. Of the 43 separate bankruptcy judges
who were recalled, 12 (28 percent) retired under CSRS or FERS and
8 had served 5 or more years of recall service.

AOUSC maintains and annually updates data on the first- year and
annual recurring costs of various types of judgeships, including
full- time magistrate and bankruptcy judgeships. AOUSC also
maintains and annually updates the average annual estimated costs
of recalled magistrate and bankruptcy judges. AOUSC's cost data
includes the salaries and benefits of the judges and any support
staff, plus the cost of space, equipment, and facilities to
support the judge.

The AOUSC cost estimates for fiscal year 1999 show that the
recurring annual costs of a full- time magistrate judge is
$601,832 and the cost of a full- time bankruptcy judge is
$575,297. AOUSC estimated that it would cost $253,477 annually to
recall a retired magistrate judge to full- time service, with an
annual salary of $30,728 per year, and provide the recalled judge
with a full support staff law clerk, secretary, courtroom deputy,
and electronic court recorder. Comparable estimated costs for a
recalled bankruptcy judge were $241,402.

However, according to AOUSC, only some recalled judges have a full
personal staff. Many only have a secretary or law clerk. Using
AOUSC's fiscal year 1999 data, we estimated it would cost about
$87,000 annually to recall to full- time service a magistrate
judge who retired at full salary and provide him or her with a
secretary, but no other personal staff, while on recall service.
This total includes the estimated cost of the secretary's fringe
benefits. The comparable estimated cost for a recalled bankruptcy
judge is about $93,000.

The actual cost of a recalled judge would depend upon the amount
of the salary earned on recall service, the personal staff
provided to support the recalled judge, and any travel costs that
may be incurred while on recall service. Range of the Estimated

Annual Recurring Costs of Recalled Magistrate and Bankruptcy
Judges

B-280364 Page 17 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

On December 16, 1998, AOUSC provided written comments on a draft
of this report. AOUSC noted that although our report included no
findings or conclusions, an uninformed audience might read into
the report an implication that the judiciary had not tapped a
resource available to it when in fact there are inherent
limitations on the use of recalled judges. AOUSC noted that [ t]
here are good reasons why recalled judges are not a greater or
more predictable resource than they already are, not the least of
which is the fact that they must be at least 65 years of age to
retire under the Judicial Retirement System.

Our report is intended to provide information and analysis, not
explicit or implied conclusions or recommendations. Our report
shows that a majority of retired, eligible bankruptcy judges as of
April 30, 1998, had retired under JRS. However, as of the same
date a majority of retired, eligible magistrate judges had retired
under CSRS or FERS, and such judges did not have to be 65 years of
age to retire. We did not obtain information on the age of the
judges who were eligible for recall. AOUSC also provided technical
changes to the report that we incorporated as appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to the Chairmen and Ranking
Minority Members of the House and Senate Committees on the
Judiciary; the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the
Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts, Senate
Committee on the Judiciary; the Chairmen and Ranking Minority
Members of the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law
and Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property, House
Committee on the Judiciary; the Chairmen and Ranking Minority
Members of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, the
Judiciary, and Related Agencies, House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations; Director, AOUSC; and the Chief Agency Comments and

Our Evaluation

B-280364 Page 18 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Judge of each of the 12 federal regional circuit courts of
appeals. We will provide copies to other interested parties upon
request.

Major contributors to this report are listed in appendix VII. If
you have any questions about this report, please call me on (202)
512- 8777.

Sincerely yours, Richard M. Stana Associate Director
Administration of Justice Issues

Page 19 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Page 20 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Contents 1 Letter 24 Process for Recalling Magistrate Judges 25
Process for Recalling Bankruptcy Judges 27 Appendix I

The Process For Recalling Retired Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges

29 Eligibility 29 Compensation 30 Support Services 31 Appendix II

Recall Eligibility, Compensation, and Available Staff Support for
Recalled Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges

32 Limitations of Data on Recall Appointments 33 Data Analysis 34
Appendix III

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

36 Appendix IV Data on Recalled Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges,
by District and Fiscal Year

Contents Page 21 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Appendix V Weighted Case Filings for Courts that Recalled
Magistrate or Bankruptcy Judges, Fiscal Years 1990 to 1997

41 43 Appendix VI Comments From AOUSC

44 Appendix VII Major Contributors to This Report

Table 1: Magistrate Judges in Retirement Status, Eligible for
Recall, and Actually Recalled; and Number of Districts That
Recalled Judges, as of September 30, 1990- 1997, and April 30,
1998

9 Table 2: Bankruptcy Judges in Retirement Status, Eligible

for Recall, and Actually Recalled; and Number of Courts That
Recalled Judges, as of September 30, 19901997, and April 30, 1998

9 Table 3: Number of District and Bankruptcy Courts That

Had Recalled Judges, and the Number of Judgeship Vacancies in
These Courts, as of September 30, 19901997, and April 30, 1998

12 Table 4: Range of Weighted Case Filings for Those

Bankruptcy Courts That Recalled Judges Compared to National
Average, Fiscal Years 1992 and 1994- 1997

13 Tables

Table 5: Range of Weighted Case Filings for Those Districts That
Recalled Magistrate Judges Compared to National Average, Fiscal
Years 1990- 1997

14

Contents Page 22 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Table IV. 1: Listing of the Number of Recalled Magistrate Judge
Appointments, by District and by Fiscal Year, as of September 30,
1990- 1997, and as of April 30, 1998, in Circuit Order

36 Table IV. 2: Listing of the Number of Recalled Bankruptcy

Judge Appointments, by District and Fiscal Year, as of September
30, 1990- 1997, and as of April 30, 1998, in Circuit Order

37 Table IV. 3: Number of Retired Magistrate Judges Eligible

for Recall, Number of Eligible Judges Recalled by Type of Recall,
and Number of Recalled Judges Who Served in Previous Years, as of
September 30, 1990- 1997, and as of April 30, 1998

38 Table IV. 4: Number of Retired Bankruptcy Judges

Eligible for Recall, Number of Eligible Judges Recalled by Type of
Recall, and Number of Recalled Judges Who Served in Previous
Years, as of September 30, 1990- 1997, and as of April 30, 1998

39 Table IV. 5: Number and Percentage of Retired Magistrate

Judges Eligible for Recall and Who Were Recalled, by Pension
Status, as of September 30, 1990- 1997, and as of April 30, 1998

39 Table IV. 6: Number and Percentage of Retired

Bankruptcy Judges Eligible for Recall and Who Were Recalled, by
Pension Status, as of September 30, 19901997, and as of April 30,
1998

40 Table V. 1: District Court Weighted Case Filings, in

Districts that Recalled at Least One Magistrate Judge, Fiscal
Years 1990- 1997

41 Table V. 2: Weighted Case Filings in Bankruptcy Courts

that Recalled at Least One Judge, Fiscal Years 1992 and 1994- 1997

42 Figure 1: Twenty Five District Courts, by Circuit, That

Had a Recalled Magistrate Judge on Duty at the End of One or More
Fiscal Years, 1990- 1997, or as of April 30 1998

6 Figure 2: Thirty- Three Bankruptcy Courts, by Circuit,

That Had a Recalled Bankruptcy Judge on Duty at the End of One or
More Fiscal Years, 1990- 1997, or as of April 30, 1998

7 Figures

Contents Page 23 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges Abbreviations

AOUSC Administrative Office of the United States Courts CSRS Civil
Service Retirement System FERS Federal Employees Retirement System
JRS Judicial Retirement System OPM Office of Personnel Management
TSP Thrift Savings Plan

Appendix I The Process For Recalling Retired Magistrate and
Bankruptcy Judges

Page 24 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

The process of identifying the need for the services of recalled
magistrate and bankruptcy judges is shared by the district or
bankruptcy court, the circuit judicial council of the circuit in
which the district or bankruptcy court is located, and, in some
instances, the Judicial Conference Committee on the Administration
of the Magistrate Judges System or the Judicial Conference
Committee on the Administration of the Bankruptcy System. Briefly,
the formal process includes three basic steps: (1) the district or
bankruptcy court initiates the request for a recalled judge, (2)
the circuit judicial council reviews and approves or denies the
request, and (3) when there is a request for an intercircuit
recall (the recall of a judge outside of the circuit where the
judge served on active status), the Magistrate Judges Committee or
the Bankruptcy Committee of the Judicial Conference must approve
the appointment. The Administrative Office of the U. S. Courts
(AOUSC) provides informal support by assisting courts in locating
retired magistrate and bankruptcy judges who are able and willing
to serve on a recalled basis.

Retired magistrate and bankruptcy judges may be recalled only with
their consent and may be recalled for full- or part- time
appointments. 1 The decision to seek the appointment of a recalled
judge rests with the district or bankruptcy court that determines
it needs the services of a recalled judge. The chief judge of the
district or bankruptcy court requests a recalled judge, specifying
whether the requested recall would be full or part time, the
period of time for which the appointment is requested, and whether
staff and other expenditures are required. The circuit judicial
council reviews the district court or bankruptcy court's request
and may approve, modify, or deny the request. If the circuit
judicial council approves the request, the council is to specify
whether the recalled judge will serve on a full- or part- time
basis. Whether full or part time, the recall may be for up to 1
year and a day (ad hoc recall) or, in the case of magistrate
judges, more than 1 year but not in excess of 3 years (extended
service recall). Extended service recalls of retired bankruptcy
judges are for a fixed 3- year period. Recall terms are renewable
at the request of the district or bankruptcy court and upon
approval of the circuit judicial council. Magistrate and
bankruptcy judges who retired under the Civil Service Retirement
System (CSRS) or the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS) are
not eligible for extended recall.

AOUSC's role in the recall of retired magistrate and bankruptcy
judges is principally one of assistance to local courts by helping
them locate retired

1 Retired magistrate and bankruptcy judges who have retired under
JRS and elect to practice law after retirement are not eligible to
be recalled.

Appendix I The Process For Recalling Retired Magistrate and
Bankruptcy Judges

Page 25 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

magistrate or bankruptcy judges who are willing to serve on a
recalled basis. AOUSC assists in locating an eligible judge
willing to serve who is as close as possible, geographically, to
the district or bankruptcy court in which the recalled judge would
serve. It is important to note that an eligible judge may be
generally willing to serve on recalled status but may be unwilling
to accept a specific recalled judge assignment. For example, a
judge who retired from a district in the midwest and subsequently
moved to Florida for retirement may be willing to be recalled only
in Florida or an adjacent state.

Prior to September 1996, the court or circuit council seeking a
recalled judge had to check with AOUSC regarding the availability
of funds for the recalled judge and any support staff that he or
she may be provided. However, in September 1996, the Judicial
Conference amended the recall regulations eliminating the
requirement of funding approval by AOUSC prior to judicial council
authorization of a recalled judge and any support staff. It is now
the circuit council's responsibility to determine the need for a
recalled magistrate or bankruptcy judge and also the support
staff, if any, who will be available to the recalled judge. The
circuit council may decide to provide the recalled judge no
separate support staff (but rely on staff already in the court),
or provide the judge with his or her own secretary, law clerk, or
both.

Once the local district court determines the need to request a
recalled magistrate judge, it may call the Magistrate Judges
Division of the Office of Judges Programs in AOUSC to notify it of
the need for a full- or part- time recalled judge, including any
specific requirements for the position. For example, the recall
duties may be limited to criminal pretrial proceedings 2 or 3 days
a week or month, or the court may need a full- time recalled
magistrate judge to handle a full range of duties. In limited
circumstances, the district court may seek a full- time recalled
magistrate judge in lieu of filling a magistrate judge vacancy. In
these circumstances, the requesting district court has the
discretion of whether to request that a vacancy be filled with a
new judge or to request the appointment of a recalled judge
instead at least for a period of time.

Using its list of eligible retired magistrate judges, the
Magistrate Judges Division would generally call those eligible
judges residing in or near the requesting district, moving out to
other areas as needed. The goal is to identify an eligible judge
who is willing to serve in the position and who is geographically
as close as possible to the requesting district. This is not
always possible, however. For example, the district of New Jersey
requested a recalled magistrate judge to assist the district for
several days Process for Recalling

Magistrate Judges

Appendix I The Process For Recalling Retired Magistrate and
Bankruptcy Judges

Page 26 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

a week. AOUSC's search extended outward from New Jersey to Iowa,
where it found a judge willing to serve that court. This recall
appointment required the approval of the Magistrate Judges
Committee because it involved an intercircuit assignment. The
recalled judge had retired from the eighth circuit (which includes
Iowa) and was recalled to a position in the third circuit (which
includes New Jersey).

The Magistrate Judges Division's eligibility list consists of all
retired magistrate judges who have not declared themselves
ineligible. To assess the level of interest in being recalled and
obtain a more accurate eligibility list, in February 1997, the
Magistrate Judges Division began distributing questionnaires to
all retiring magistrate judges. The Division has not formally
surveyed retired magistrate judges who retired prior to February
1997.

The actual process of obtaining a recalled magistrate judge
varies, as follows:

 The requesting district court may provide to AOUSC the names of
retired magistrates judges whom the district believes are eligible
and willing to serve on recall duty and either directly ask these
retired judges if they are willing to serve or ask AOUSC to call
these retired judges to determine if they are willing to serve.

 The requesting court may ask AOUSC to contact someone from
AOUSC's eligibility list for recall duty.

 By prior arrangement, and with the approval of the circuit
council, a magistrate judge may transition directly from active to
recall status, (i. e., retire on Friday and return as a recalled
judge on the following Monday).

According to AOUSC, when a court asks for one or more additional
magistrate judge positions, AOUSC does a formal survey to review
the district's workload and its use of magistrate judges. AOUSC's
policy for conducting this survey is that the survey team is to
assess the possible use of recalled judges in lieu of an
additional position. For those districts that do not request
additional magistrate judge positions, the Judicial Conference
mandates a review every 4 to 5 years of the use of magistrate
judges and whether the use of recalled judges is a reasonable
option. The results are to be reported to the Magistrate Judges
Committee, which reviews all positions and recommends to the
Judicial Conference whether the new positions should be authorized
and whether existing positions should be continued.

Appendix I The Process For Recalling Retired Magistrate and
Bankruptcy Judges

Page 27 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

The process for recalling bankruptcy judges is generally similar
to that used for recalling magistrate judges. One difference is
that it is the responsibility of the requesting bankruptcy court
to formally advise the Bankruptcy Judges Division of the Office of
Judges Programs in AOUSC that the court is requesting the services
of a recall judge. The circuit council would be more likely than
AOUSC to know which retired bankruptcy judges may be available and
willing to be recalled within the circuit (especially for
intracircuit service). Thus, it is not unusual for the names of
retired bankruptcy judges available for service to accompany the
formal notice to AOUSC.

The Bankruptcy Judges Division's eligibility list contains all
retired judges who have not declared themselves ineligible.
Ineligible retired bankruptcy judges include those who have
notified AOUSC that they plan to practice law in retirement. To
obtain a more accurate eligibility list and assess retiring
judges' interest in being recalled, in April 1998, the Division
began to request information from all retiring bankruptcy judges
that included a judge's interest in serving in a recall position.
AOUSC has not gathered similar information on a systematic basis
from bankruptcy judges who retired prior to April 1998.

When a judgeship vacancy occurs in a bankruptcy court, the
Bankruptcy Judges Division, upon request, is to make available to
that court a list of retired bankruptcy judges available for
recall in the circuit and to encourage the court to use recalled
judges. If a court requests help in obtaining a recall candidate,
the Division is to call judges on its eligibility list, using the
same criteria as the Magistrate Judges Division (geographic
proximity) to find a candidate.

The Judicial Conference requires the Bankruptcy Judges Division to
conduct surveys in even numbered years to assess the continued
need for existing authorized bankruptcy judgeship positions. The
principal criteria for assessing continued judgeship needs is the
weighted case filings per judgeship in the district. The biennial
bankruptcy judgeship assessment process to determine the need for
additional judgeships includes surveys and on- site reviews in
which a team (with a bankruptcy judge of a different district as a
member) visits the bankruptcy court that has requested an
additional judgeship( s). 2 One goal of the team is to alert the
bankruptcy court to the option of using recall judges in lieu of
requesting additional

2 For a more detailed explanation of the Judicial Conference's
process for assessing bankruptcy judgeship needs, see Federal
Judiciary: Bankruptcy Judgeship Requests, 1993- 1997 (GAO/ T- GGD-
97183, Sept. 22, 1997). Process for Recalling

Bankruptcy Judges

Appendix I The Process For Recalling Retired Magistrate and
Bankruptcy Judges

Page 28 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

judgeship positions. As part of its site visit, the team is to
discuss the recall option, its benefits, and identify the retired
judges available for recall.

Appendix II Recall Eligibility, Compensation, and Available Staff
Support for Recalled Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges

Page 29 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Eligibility for recall service, the compensation paid to recalled
judges, and the staff support available to recalled judges are
governed by statute and Judicial Conference policy and
regulations.

Generally, magistrate judges and bankruptcy judges who have
retired from the bench are eligible for recall service. A retired
bankruptcy or magistrate judge may be recalled to service in
accordance with regulations promulgated by the Judicial Conference
under 28 U. S. C.  155 (b) and 636 (h), respectively. Under the
Conference's regulations, a retired magistrate or bankruptcy judge
may be recalled to ad hoc recall service for renewable periods of
1 year and 1 day, or for extended recall service for renewable 3-
year periods. There is no limit to the number of renewals that may
be approved. Any judge who is receiving an annuity is eligible for
ad hoc recall service. Judges may qualify for an annuity under
several retirement systems CSRS; FERS; the Judicial Retirement
System (JRS), available only to full- time judges; 1 or a hybrid
version of JRS in which a judge receives a pension paid from both
JRS and CSRS or FERS. 2 However, only magistrate and bankruptcy
judges who have retired on full salary under straight or hybrid
JRS and are at least 65 years of age are eligible for extended
recall.

A circuit judicial council may recall a retired magistrate or
bankruptcy judge with the judge's consent, but recall is subject
to the availability of funds to pay any associated expenses, such
as per diem and travel expenses. A retired judge may serve in any
district upon recall. The court to which the judge is recalled
determines the location and duration of the recalled judge's
service and may impose limitations on the scope of service
provided on recall. The term of recall may be for full- or part-
time service and may be modified or terminated at any time by the
judicial council of the circuit in which the judge is recalled.

A judge who retires under JRS and who practices law after
retirement is not eligible for recall service. Nor are such
retired judges eligible for any annual cost- of- living
adjustments in their JRS annuity subsequent to notifying AOUSC of
their intent to practice law. Moreover, a judge who retires under
JRS and fails to notify AOUSC prior to engaging in the practice of
law forfeits his or her annuity. However, magistrate judges who
did not retire under JRS and who practiced law after retirement
may be recalled to part- time service and may continue to practice
law while in

1 All full- time magistrate and bankruptcy judges are eligible to
elect coverage under JRS at any time prior to 30 days before
leaving office. 2 The hybrid JRS annuity is available only to
judges in office on November 15, 1988. Eligibility

Appendix II Recall Eligibility, Compensation, and Available Staff
Support for Recalled Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges

Page 30 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

recall service. Magistrate judges may not practice law while
serving fulltime recall service.

Retired magistrate and bankruptcy judges who are recalled to full-
time judicial duties may receive pay equal to the difference
between the amount of their pensions and the salary of a full-
time magistrate or bankruptcy judge. Retired judges who are
recalled to part- time service are paid a daily wage. For each day
of service, the judge would receive the daily salary of the office
for that day less the portion of the judge's annuity allocable to
that day.

A retired judge who is recalled to full- time service is entitled
to the salary of the office to which he or she is recalled less
the annuity allocable to the period of recall service. For
example, a bankruptcy judge who retired with an annuity equal to
100 percent of the salary of the office to which he or she was
recalled would receive no additional compensation. However, a
bankruptcy judge who retired on an $80,000 annuity who is recalled
to fulltime service would receive wages of $45,764 the difference
between the $80,000 annuity and the $125,764 salary of a full-
time bankruptcy judge.

A retired judge may also be recalled on a less than full- time
basis, referred to as when actually employed. In such cases, the
recalled judge's salary is computed on a daily basis. For each day
of service, the judge would receive the daily salary of the office
for that day less the portion of the judge's annuity allocable to
that day. For example, if the annual salary of the office were
$123,000, the daily salary rate would be about $473 ($ 123,000
divided by 260 days the number of days in a standard work year).
If the recalled judge were receiving an annuity of $80,000, the
daily proportion of the annuity would be about $222 ($ 80,000/ 360
days the number of days using 12, 30- day calendar months). Thus,
the judge would receive about $251 per day for each day of recall
service ($ 473 - $222).

Recall service may not be credited and used to increase the amount
of a judge's retirement annuity under JRS. However, a recalled
judge who is receiving a retirement annuity under CSRS or FERS may
earn an increased annuity as a result of recall service.

For continuous recall service equal to at least 1 year but less
than 5 years of full- time service, the judge is entitled to a
supplemental annuity equal to 2.5 percent (CSRS) or 1 percent
(FERS) of the judge's basic pay averaged during the recall period.
For recall service of 5 or more years of continuous full- time
service, the judge may elect this supplemental annuity or have the
total CSRS or FERS annuity recalculated based on a new
Compensation

Effect of Recall Service on A Judge's Pension

Appendix II Recall Eligibility, Compensation, and Available Staff
Support for Recalled Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges

Page 31 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

average salary. For example, a retired judge who is paid a CSRS
annuity of $50,000 based on 20 years service and a high- 3 average
salary of $100,000 (20 years x 2.5 percent x $100,000) and who is
recalled full time to a position paying $123,000 annually, would
be entitled to a recomputed annuity of $76,875 after 5 years of
recall service (25 years x 2.5 percent x $123,000). However, a
recalled judge must contribute to CSRS or FERS in order to receive
a supplemental or recomputed annuity. Judges who have retired
under CSRS may contribute up to 5 percent of their wages to the
Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) during their term of recall service.
Judges who retired under FERS, or those who retired under CSRS,
but elect FERS during their period of recall service, may, within
certain limitations, contribute up to 10 percent of their wages
and receive government contributions. According to AOUSC, judges
who retired under JRS are not eligible to contribute to TSP while
on recall.

A recalled judge is entitled to the services of a secretary and a
law clerk (1) on a showing of need, (2) with the approval of the
judicial council, and (3) subject to the availability of
appropriated funds. A recalled judge is also entitled to travel
and per diem expenses in the same manner as an active judge.
Support Services

Appendix III Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Page 32 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Our objectives were to determine for the period October 1, 1989,
through April 30, 1998, (1) whether the demand for recalled
magistrate and bankruptcy judges has exceeded the number of judges
available to serve in recalled positions, (2) whether the courts
that recalled magistrate and bankruptcy judges had judgeship
vacancies or higher than average weighted case filings, and (3)
the approximate 1- year cost savings associated with using a
recalled judge rather than filling a full- time magistrate or
bankruptcy judgeship position.

To meet these objectives, we requested and AOUSC provided data as
of September 30 for each fiscal year from 1990 through 1997, and
as of April 30 for fiscal year 1998 on (1) the number of retired
judges eligible for recalled service, (2) the number of recalled
positions filled by magistrate and bankruptcy judges who had
retired on full or partial salary, (3) the number of retired
magistrate and bankruptcy judges who filled these positions, and
(4) the judgeship vacancies and weighted case filings of those
courts that used recalled judges. Specifically, AOUSC provided
data as of September 30, 1990 to 1997 and as of April 30, 1998 on
the

 number of judges in retirement status;

 number of judges who had retired each year under JRS, CSRS, or
FERS;

 number of judges who retired each year with a pension equal to
full salary;

 number of judges who retired each year with a pension that was
less than full salary;

 number of judges who were eligible for recall each year;

 number of judges in recall status at the end of each fiscal year;

 number and duration of magistrate and bankruptcy judgeship
appointments each year and the dates of those appointments;

 weighted case filings per authorized district judgeship in
district courts for each fiscal year 1990 through 1997;

Appendix III Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Page 33 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

 weighted case filings per authorized bankruptcy judgeship in
bankruptcy courts for fiscal years 1992 and 1994 through 1997
(fiscal year data for 1990, 1991, and 1993 were not available); 1

 number of vacancies each year in those courts that recalled
magistrate or bankruptcy judges, including the dates those
vacancies occurred and were filled; and,

 the estimated fiscal year 1999 costs of creating and maintaining
a new fulltime magistrate or bankruptcy judgeship, including
salaries, benefits, support staff, and space and facilities.

AOUSC's data on the number of judges in retirement status each
year and the number of judges who were eligible for recall each
year were cumulative. Thus, for example, the fiscal year 1997 data
on retired magistrate judges included all judges in retirement
status as of September 30, 1997, whether the judges had retired in
fiscal year 1997 or a previous year. All other data AOUSC provided
were not cumulative. For example, the data on the number of judges
who retired in fiscal year 1997 under JRS included only the judges
who retired that year, not those judges who had retired under JRS
in previous years.

To determine the net number of retired magistrate and bankruptcy
judges at the end of each fiscal year, we obtained data from AOUSC
and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) on the dates of death
of retired judges who died during the period October 1, 1989,
through April 30, 1998. AOUSC officials said that AOUSC does not
maintain post- retirement data on magistrate and bankruptcy judges
who retired under one of the two principal civil service
retirement systems CSRS or FERS. For judges who retired under one
of these retirement systems, OPM provided data on the dates of
death.

The data AOUSC provided on recall appointments included judges
whose recall appointments were in effect as of September 30 of
each fiscal year from 1990 through 1997 and as of April 30, 1998,
for fiscal year 1998. Consequently, for fiscal years 1990 through
1997, the data AOUSC

1 Weighted case filings were not available for fiscal years 1990,
1991, and 1993 for bankruptcy courts. Although weighted case
filings for these years were available for statistical years
ending June 30 and calendar years ending December 31, we did not
use these data because they would not be comparable to the fiscal
year data provided for other years. Limitations of Data on

Recall Appointments

Appendix III Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Page 34 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

provided did not include appointments made on or after October 1
of each fiscal year that expired prior to September 30 of each
fiscal year. Nor did it include any appointments made on or after
October 1, 1997, that expired prior to April 30, 1998. AOUSC
officials said that they believed the number of appointments that
were not included in our data were relatively few, and our
interviews with the 12 Circuit Executives also indicated that
during the period of our review there were few recall appointments
of less than 1 year.

From the data provided by AOUSC and OPM, we determined (1) the
percentage of retired judges whom AOUSC data indicated were
eligible for recall each year; (2) the number who were actually on
recall duty at the end of each fiscal year during 1990 through
1997 and as of April 30, 1998; (3) the districts to which they
were recalled; (4) the number who were reappointed to their recall
positions each year; (5) the number of recalled judges who did and
did not retire on full salary; (6) the weighted case filings of
the districts who used recalled judges each fiscal year (for those
years where data were available); (7) whether the districts who
recalled judges had one or more judgeship vacancies during the
period of recall service; and (8) the approximate cost savings of
using a recalled judge rather than filling a vacant full- time
magistrate or bankruptcy judgeship position.

We reviewed the data provided by AOUSC for internal consistency by
choosing a judgmental sample of AOUSC's data on retired and
recalled judges, tracing the data back to source documents, and
verifying that the data AOUSC provided matched the data on the
source documents. Our sample included retired and recalled
magistrate and bankruptcy judges from several different years and
geographically diverse districts.

The Circuit Councils review and must approve requests for recalled
judges. We interviewed the Circuit Executive in each of the 12
regional circuits regarding (1) the reasons why some district and
bankruptcy courts requested recalled judges and others within the
circuit did not; (2) what incentives and disincentives there may
be for district and bankruptcy courts to use recalled judges and
for retired judges to serve on recall duty; and (3) information on
alternatives to recalled judges, such as the use of visiting
judges on intracircuit or intercircuit assignments. We summarized
the results of these interviews to identify common practices and
differences among the circuits.

We obtained information on the policies for determining retired
judges' eligibility for service and for recalling retired
magistrate or bankruptcy Data Analysis

Appendix III Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Page 35 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

judges from the AOUSC publication, Retirement Benefits for
Bankruptcy Judges and Magistrate Judges (1995 edition), and the
semiannual minutes of the Judicial Conference and its Committees
on (1) the Administration of the Magistrate Judges System and (2)
the Administration of the Bankruptcy System for calendar years
1990 through 1997.

We used AOUSC data on the salary and benefits of full- time
magistrate and bankruptcy judges, the salary and benefits of their
support staff (law clerk, secretary, courtroom deputy, electronic
court recorder), and the cost of space and equipment for new
magistrate and bankruptcy judges, to estimate the comparative
costs of using a recalled judge instead of adding a new judge. For
recalled judges without a full support staff, we assumed the
recalled judges had a full- time secretary, but no other staff,
during the period of recall service. For the cost of the recalled
judges' salary, we used AOUSC's average estimated salary for
recalled judges.

Appendix IV Data on Recalled Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges, by
District and Fiscal Year

Page 36 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

This appendix contains data on the number of recalled magistrate
and bankruptcy judge positions filled by districts as of September
30, 1990, through 1997 and as of April 30, 1998, (tables IV. 1 and
IV. 2). Tables IV. 3 and IV. 4 show the number of retired
magistrate and bankruptcy judges who were recalled for ad hoc
recall and extended recalled service each year. Tables IV. 5 and
IV. 6 contain data on the pension status of the judges eligible
for recall and those eligible judges who were recalled each year
during the period of our review.

Circuit/ District 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Total D. C.

D. C. 1 1 2 First

RI 1 1 1 1 4 Second

NY- N 1 1 1 3

NY- W 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 Third

PA- E 1 2 2 2 2 9

NJ 1 1 Fourth

SC 1 1 1 3 Fifth

MS- N 1 1

TX- S 1 1 1 1 4 Sixth

MI- E 1 1 1 1 2 2 8

OH- N 1 1

OH- S 2 2 Seventh

IL- C 1 1 2 Eighth

MN 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 9

MO- E 1 1 1 1 1 1 6

NE 1 1 2 Ninth

CA- C 1 1

CA- E 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7

CA- N 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 12

CA- S 1 1

OR 1 2 2 2 1 1 9

WA- E 1 1 2 Tenth

NM 1 1 1 1 4 Eleventh

FL- S 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8

GA- N 3 3 Table IV. 1: Listing of the Number of

Recalled Magistrate Judge Appointments, by District and by Fiscal
Year, as of September 30, 1990- 1997, and as of April 30, 1998, in
Circuit Order

Appendix IV Data on Recalled Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges, by
District and Fiscal Year

Page 37 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Circuit/ District 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Total Total 4 6 7 9 13 16 20 18 18 111

Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC data.

Circuit/ District 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Total Second

CT 1 1

NY- E 1 1 1 1 1 1 6

NY- S 1 1 1 1 4

VT 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 Third

PA- W 1 1 1 1 1 5 Fourth

NC- M 1 1 1 1 1 5

NC- W 1 1 1 1 1 5

VA- E 1 1 1 1 1 5 Fifth

LA- E 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7

TX- E 1 1 2

TX- S 1 1 Sixth

KY- E 1 1 1 1 4

MI- E 1 1

MI- W 1 1 1 3

OH- N 2 3 2 1 1 9

OH- S 1 1 1 1 1 5

TN- E 1 1 1 1 1 5 Seventh

IL- C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9

IL- N 1 1 1 1 4

IN- N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9

WI- E 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 Eighth

MN 1 1 1 1 1 5 Ninth

CA- C 1 1 2 2 1 1 8

CA- E 1 1 2

CA- N 1 1 1 1 1 5

HI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7

NV 1 1 1 1 1 5

OR 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9

WA- E 1 1 1 1 4

WA- W 1 1 1 1 4 Tenth

NM 1 1

OK- W 1 1 1 3 Eleventh Table IV. 2: Listing of the Number of

Recalled Bankruptcy Judge Appointments, by District and Fiscal
Year, as of September 30, 1990- 1997, and as of April 30, 1998, in
Circuit Order

Appendix IV Data on Recalled Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges, by
District and Fiscal Year

Page 38 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Circuit/ District 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Total

AL- N 1 1 Total 10 10 12 11 23 24 22 22 25 159

Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC data.

Number of judges recalled Effective date

Number of judges eligible for recall Ad hoc

recall Extended recall Total

Number of recalled judges who served

in previous year a

09- 30- 90 19 4 0 4 N/ A 09- 30- 91 30 6 0 6 4 09- 30- 92 44 7 0 7
5 09- 30- 93 49 9 0 9 7 09- 30- 94 60 12 1 13 8 09- 30- 95 73 15 1
16 11 09- 30- 96 83 19 1 20 14 09- 30- 97 92 17 1 18 13 04- 30- 98
96 17 1 18 15

Note: N/ A = not applicable a Judges whose recall terms were
renewed or judges who were serving on extended recall.

Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC data.

Table IV. 3: Number of Retired Magistrate Judges Eligible for
Recall, Number of Eligible Judges Recalled by Type of Recall, and
Number of Recalled Judges Who Served in Previous Years, as of
September 30, 1990- 1997, and as of April 30, 1998

Appendix IV Data on Recalled Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges, by
District and Fiscal Year

Page 39 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Number of judges recalled Effective date Number of judges

eligible for recall Ad hoc recall Extended recall Total Number of
recalled judges who served in previous year a

09- 30- 90 18 10 0 10 N/ A 09- 30- 91 22 10 0 10 10

09- 30- 92 27 12 0 12 9

09- 30- 93 33 11 0 11 10

09- 30- 94 42 16 7 23 10

09- 30- 95 47 16 8 24 20

09- 30- 96 50 12 10 22 19

09- 30- 97 55 17 5 22 20

04- 30- 98 60 22 3 25 18

Note: N/ A = not applicable a Judges whose recall terms were
renewed or judges who were serving on extended recall.

Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC data.

Number of retired judges eligible for recall Number of eligible
retired

judges who were recalled Percentage of eligible retired judges who
were recalled a Effective date Retired at less

than full salary Retired at full salary Retired at less

than full salary Retired at full salary Retired at less

than full salary Retired at full salary

09- 30- 90 19 0 4 0 21 N/ A 09- 30- 91 26 4 5 1 19 25 09- 30- 92
35 9 4 3 11 33 09- 30- 93 36 13 6 3 17 23 09- 30- 94 43 17 6 7 14
41 09- 30- 95 50 23 7 9 14 39 09- 30- 96 58 25 9 11 16 44 09- 30-
97 61 31 8 10 13 32 04- 30- 98 61 35 8 10 13 29

Note: N/ A = not applicable a Rounded to nearest whole number.

Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC data.

Table IV. 4: Number of Retired Bankruptcy Judges Eligible for
Recall, Number of Eligible Judges Recalled by Type of Recall, and
Number of Recalled Judges Who Served in Previous Years, as of
September 30, 1990- 1997, and as of April 30, 1998

Table IV. 5: Number and Percentage of Retired Magistrate Judges
Eligible for Recall and Who Were Recalled, by Pension Status, as
of September 30, 1990- 1997, and as of April 30, 1998

Appendix IV Data on Recalled Magistrate and Bankruptcy Judges, by
District and Fiscal Year

Page 40 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Number of retired judges eligible for recall Number of retired
judges

who were recalled Percentage of retired judges eligible for recall
who were recalled a Effective date Retired at less

than full salary Retired at full salary Retired at less

than full salary Retired at full salary Retired at less than

full salary Retired at full salary

09- 30- 90 13 5 10 0 77 0 09- 30- 91 15 7 10 0 67 0 09- 30- 92 14
13 10 2 71 15 09- 30- 93 16 17 8 3 50 18 09- 30- 94 15 27 9 14 60
52 09- 30- 95 14 33 6 18 43 55 09- 30- 96 15 35 5 17 33 49 09- 30-
97 16 39 4 18 25 46 04- 30- 98 17 43 7 18 41 42

a Rounded to nearest whole number. Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC
data.

Table IV. 6: Number and Percentage of Retired Bankruptcy Judges
Eligible for Recall and Who Were Recalled, by Pension Status, as
of September 30, 1990- 1997, and as of April 30, 1998

Appendix V Weighted Case Filings for Courts that Recalled
Magistrate or Bankruptcy Judges, Fiscal Years 1990 to 1997

Page 41 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Circuit/ District 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 National
average a 427 386 412 419 419 448 472 519 D. C.

D. C. b 306 327 278 274 271 237 251 259 First

RI 326 316 353 292 283 322 298 308 Second

NY- N 419 357 414 387 463 452 494 454

NY- W 413 435 506 522 504 510 492 497 Third

NJ 446 386 382 395 414 449 423 443

PA- E 442 373 387 376 404 405 376 402 Fourth

SC 451 443 449 501 488 527 520 580 Fifth

MS- N 381 358 407 465 407 379 428 444 TX- S 695 450 465 457 486
887 503 543

Sixth

MI- E 355 376 437 397 387 419 459 1,649

OH- N 450 349 370 441 415 424 486 504

OH- S 404 376 411 381 388 395 436 440

Seventh

IL- C 404 332 331 357 299 371 361 383 Eighth

MN 353 376 372 403 419 422 458 542

MO- E 457 338 356 382 377 393 441 462 NE 520 353 354 339 353 355
377 410

Ninth

CA- C 442 362 405 411 407 431 451 424 CA- E 427 376 417 436 465
537 570 601

CA- N 412 352 368 431 438 424 490 492

CA- S 519 517 677 602 560 726 833 814 OR 492 476 464 450 513 572
513 536

WA- E 347 288 261 275 253 264 301 259

Tenth

NM 542 477 536 562 579 585 651 653 Eleventh

FL- S 520 507 436 457 464 551 634 605

a Weighted case filings per authorized district judge. b For each
district court, weighted case filings are shown in bold for the
year( s) in which the district court had a recalled judge on duty
at the end of the fiscal year. Source: GAO analysis of AOUSC data.

Table V. 1: District Court Weighted Case Filings, in Districts
that Recalled at Least One Magistrate Judge, Fiscal Years 1990-
1997

Appendix V Weighted Case Filings for Courts that Recalled
Magistrate or Bankruptcy Judges, Fiscal Years 1990 to 1997

Page 42 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Circuit/ District 1992 a 1994 1995 1996 1997 National average 1,
437 1,227 1,149 1,272 1,436 Second

CT 1,662 1,552 1,200 1,404 1,378 NY- E b 1,904 1,737 1,682 1,729
1,640

NY- S 1,916 1,271 1,396 1,394 1,510

VT 741 514 536 544 639 Third

PA- W 1,062 813 752 819 923 Fourth

NC- M 821 612 675 883 1,062

NC- W 1,470 950 937 1,363 2,321

VA- E 1,935 1,389 1,484 1,631 1,887 Fifth

LA- E 1,197 948 924 991 1,145

TX- E 1,179 1,218 1,392 1,699 1,838

TX- S 1,484 1,173 1,249 1,392 1,352 Sixth

KY- E 1,236 802 844 919 1,030 MI- E 2,067 1,811 1,713 1,679 2,104
MI- W 1,215 897 903 1,013 1,266 OH- N 1,032 699 788 747 871

OH- S 1,067 747 815 949 1,009

TN- E 1,100 942 854 1,166 1,306 Seventh

IL- C 886 654 742 873 1,068

IL- N 1,199 1,130 968 1,179 1,291

IN- N 1,098 791 794 933 1,112

WI- E 619 507 563 800 757

Eighth

MN 1,487 1,333 1,260 1,452 1,466 Ninth

CA- C 2,144 2,084 1,859 1,904 1,847 CA- E 1,576 1,542 1,385 1,578
1,813 CA- N 1,828 1,574 1,374 1,431 1,524 HI 779 767 819 1,047
1,237

NV 1,380 1,150 1,120 1,282 1,510

OR 1,050 1,012 916 981 1,043 WA- E 821 645 674 808 969

WA- W 1,267 1,296 1,204 1,466 1,611 Tenth

NM 1,029 792 681 1,062 1,138 OK- W 930 768 712 1,007 1,198
Eleventh

AL- N 1,595 1,649 1,843 1,717 1,876 a Fiscal year data were not
available for fiscal years 1990, 1991, and 1993.

b For each bankruptcy court, weighted case filings are shown in
bold for the year( s) in which the bankruptcy court had a recalled
judge on duty at the end of the fiscal year. Source: GAO analysis
of AOUSC data.

Table V. 2: Weighted Case Filings in Bankruptcy Courts that
Recalled at Least One Judge, Fiscal Years 1992 and 1994- 1997

Appendix VI Comments From AOUSC

Page 43 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

Appendix VII Major Contributors to This Report

Page 44 GAO/GGD-99-22 Recalled Judges

William Jenkins, Jr., Assistant Director Christopher Conrad,
Evaluator- in- Charge Mary Kay Muse, Senior Evaluator

Geoffrey Hamilton, Senior Attorney Advisor General Government

Division Dallas Field Office Office of General Counsel

Ordering Information The first copy of each GAO report and
testimony is free. Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be
sent to the following address, accompanied by a check or money
order made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when necessary.
VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also. Orders for
100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are discounted
25 percent.

Order by mail: U. S. General Accounting Office P. O. Box 37050
Washington, DC 20013

or visit: Room 1100 700 4 th St. NW (corner of 4 th and G Sts. NW)
U. S. General Accounting Office Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512- 6000 or by using
fax number (301) 258- 4066, or TDD (301) 413- 0006.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and
testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any
list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512- 6000 using a
touch- tone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how
to obtain these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET, send
e- mail message with info in the body to:

info@ www. gao. gov or visit GAO's World Wide Web Home Page at:
http:// www. gao. gov

United States General Accounting Office Washington, D. C. 20548-
0001

Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid GAO Permit No. G100

(188642)

*** End of document. ***