Happy Birthda)ly DCAs BY KENT L. RI C HLA ND Th e mi ss ion of th e Ca li fornia Supreme Co urt Historical Society is much broader than is implied by its name. The Society is dedicated to the prese r- vation and promotion of the history of California's entire judicial system. As a consequence, this is an important year for the Society - it is the centenn ial of the es tablishme nt of Ca lifornia's int ermediate appellate courts. On November 8, 2004, th e First, Second and Third Appe ll ate Districts will be one hundred years old. In the beginning - the beginning, in thi s in- stance, being 18 49 , the year th e Californ ia Constitution was adopted - the state's only appellate cou rt was the Supreme Court. Then comprised of a Chief Justice and two Associate Justices, the Court heard appeals fr om the decisions of both trial court and the alca ldes (local officia ls wh o combined th e duties of ma yo r, police chief a nd judge), so long as the amount in controversy exceeded two hundred do ll ars. For several years th e Supreme Court's caseload rema in ed man agea bl e be ca use, as Repo rt er of Decisions Charl es A. Tuttle explained, "little atten- tion was ... paid to the acquisiti on of any o ther property than go ld ." But with the growth of mining and agriculture came a need for great er predictabili- ty in the ownership of real property, a problem made a ll the more complex by the fact that much property was held under Spanish and Mexican land grants, and boundaries were vaguely defined at best. As a result, in 1862, the Constitution was amended to increase the number of Associate Justices to four and to increase the jurisdictional thresho ld to three hundred do ll ars. The burgeoning caseload led, in 1880 , to the addition of two more Associate Justices, bringing the total number of justices on the Court to its present complement of seven. But at the same time, the Court was divided into two divisions composed of three justices each - thus ostensibly doubling the number of cases that cou ld be heard - with provision fo r en bane hearings in the discret ion of the C hief Justice or on the vote of four Associate Justices. By 1904, with the population of California teem- in g at 1.4 mill io n, eve n th e reshuffled Supreme Court could not handle the volume of appeals. Three District Courts of Appeal were created: district one embraced the Co unty of San Francisco and o ther counties genera lly in the center Colltill ll ed o il page u NEWS LETTER· S PRI NG /SU MMER 2004 California's Courts and Judges : From the 19th to the 21 st Century BY DONNA SC H UELE In le ss th an thr ee years, the Supreme Cou rt h as experie nced the passing of t hree justic es , Sta nl ey M osk , Ma rcu s Ka ufman a nd David Eagl eso n. Having previously memoria li zed Justices Mask and Kaufman, the California Supreme Court Historical Soc iety pays homage to Justice Eagleson in this issue of th e News le tt er. Rick Se itz, wh o served as a research a tto rney fo r Jus tice Eagleson, provides an admiring view of his contributions to the Court and California jurisprudence. Justice Eagleson's daughter Beth, herself a member of the bar, foll ows with a touching portrait linking the professional a nd the personal in her father's life. This i ss ue's focus on the Court a nd its members continues in two more direct ions. Look ing back, Fran Jones and Martha Nob le offer a survey of 150 years of Ca lifornia's chief justices, in a fasc inating co mparison of th e ninet ee nth and twentie th cen- turi es. Their article complements an exhibit on the chief justices on display through July at the Court's headqua rt ers in San Fra nci sco. And, spotlighting one of our more infa mous chief justices, David Terry, Los Angeles Time s reporte r Cecilia Rasmussen e nt ert a iningly reminds us that fr o ntier California earned its "wild west" reputation not without help fr om the bench and bar. Moving forward, our c urr e nt C hi ef Justic e, Rona ld M. G eo rge, and Co urt of App eal Justice Patricia Bama ttr e-Ma nouki an hi ghli ght a very twenty-first-ce ntury role that the Court has unde r- taken - engaging in public outreach and education through annu al special oral argument sessions held around the state. In 2001, the Co urt heard argume nt in Sant a Ana, and in 2002 traveled to Fresno. In th is issu e, C hi ef Ju st i ce Geor ge a nd Ju s tice Bamattre -Manouki an describe the Court's 2003 return to San Jose fo r the fir st time in nearly 150 years. Building on the experiences of the Santa Ana and Fresno sess ions, those planning the San Jose ses- sion succeeded in involving a wide ran ge of partici- pants: s tud e nt s ranging from hi gh sch ool to law school, loca l a ttorneys and judges, dignit aries and othe rs, in a va ri ety of programs both educat ional and socia l. This newsle tter i ssue focuses on other as pects of Cal i fo rni a's judicial branch as we ll , looking both for- ward a nd back in time. Soc iety Pr esid en t Kent Richland draws attentio n to thi s year's one- hun - dredth anni versary of the Court of Colltinlled oil pa ge 15 3