United States v. Alaska

Background

The Court appointed J. Keith Mann, Esquire, of Stanford, California, as Special Master in this case. The order gives him power to set the timetable and conditions for additional filings, to direct further proceedings, to summon witnesses, to issue subpoenas, and to take evidence that he finds necessary. The order also directs the Master to submit reports he considers appropriate and allows him to be reimbursed for his actual expenses.

Reasoning

Faced with the need for organized fact-gathering and management of the next steps, the Court vested the Special Master with broad procedural authority. The order specifies the Master’s duties: regulating filings, collecting testimony and documents, and reporting to the Court. The order specifically lists allowances, compensation for technical, stenographic, and clerical assistants, printing costs for the report, and other proper expenses as chargeable items, and it provides that those costs will be charged to the parties in proportions the Court will later determine.

Real world impact

Practically, the ruling means an outside lawyer will run much of the case’s fact-finding and administrative work. Witnesses may be called and evidence compelled by subpoena under his direction. The parties should expect to share the costs the Master incurs according to a future Court allocation. If the Special Master position becomes vacant while the Court is not in session, the order gives the Chief Justice authority to appoint a new Special Master whose designation will have the same effect as one made by the full Court. This is a procedural, case-management order meant to move the case forward rather than a final decision on the case’s merits.