require the appointment of counsel. Two
adjacent districts may be combined to reach
this total.
Each defender organization submits to the
director of the Administrative Office an annual
report of its activities along with a proposed
budget. Because they rely on grants and not
regular funding, community defender organiza-
tions submit grant proposals to the Administra-
tive Office for the coming year. The director
then submits the proposed budgets and grants
to the Judicial Conference of the United States
for approval. After budgets are determined, the
director pays the defender organizations. The
director also compensates private counsel
appointed to defend individuals charged in
federal court.
In wake of the
SEPTEMBER 11TH ATTACKS in
2001, the Administrative Office relied on its
newly created Office of Emergency Prepared-
ness. This office worked with courts around the
United States to develop crisis response plans to
deal with emergency evacuations, relocations,
and the continuation of court business. The
office also arranged for the testing of court-
houses for hazardous materials.
FURTHER READINGS
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts Website. Available
online at http://www.uscourts.gov/adminoff.html
(accessed June 25, 2009).

“headless ‘fourth branch’ of government.”
The committee found that the laws that
created administrative agencies failed to distin-
guish between the legislative and executive
functions of those committees. It recommended
that each of the existing administrative agencies
be moved into the
EXECUTIVE BRANCH of the
government and that the judicial powers of the
agencies be limited. Members of Congress and
many commentators at the time disagreed with
the committee’s findings. At the center of the
debate was the need to maintain a
SEPARATION OF
POWERS
with respect to the work of federal
agencies.
In 1939 President Roosevelt established the
Attorney General’s Committee on Administra-
tive Procedure. The committee was charged
with the responsibility of reviewing criticisms of
the federal administrative processes and formu-
lating recommendations for improvement in
these processes. The committee issued its recom-
mendations in 1941 in a detailed report of almost
500 pages. Legislation was drafted based upon
the recommendations of the 1941 report, but
the U.S. entrance into
WORLD WAR II interrupted
the enactment of the statute. After the war, the

rulemaking and adjudication contained in the
APA note that this distinction best represents the
basic functions of administrative agencies.
The rulemaking provisions of the APA are
more detailed than those governing adjudica-
tions. Most agencies engage in not ice-and-
comment rulemaking, which is required as the
minimum rulemaking procedure under the
APA. Under notice-and-comment rulemaking,
agencies are required to give the public advance
notice of the contents of a proposed rule and to
offer citizens an opportunity to express their
views of the proposed rule before the agency.
Some agencies are required by the statutes that
created them to follow more stringent stan-
dards, whereby all of the agency’s actions during
rulemaking are conducted “on the record.” This
latter type of rulemaking is known as formal
rulemaking.
The APA defines and governs only those
types of adjudications that are required by
statute to be conducted “on the record after
opportunity for an agency hearing.” If an
agency is required to conduct such a formal
adjudication under the APA, it must engage in a
proceeding that resembles a trial. However, if
the agency is not required to conduct such a
hearing, the APA remains silent. Accordingly ,
an agency may adopt its own procedure for an
informal adjudication, so long as the agency

, Pub. L. No. 89-487, 80 Stat. 250 (codified
as amended at 5 U.S.C.A. § 552), which greatly
increased the amount of government informa-
tion that is available to the public. Congress
later enacted similar laws designed to make
governmental decisions open to the public,
including the
PRIVACY ACT OF 1974, Pub. L. No.
93-579, 88 Stat. 1896 (codified as amended at
5 U.S.C.A. § 552a); the Government in the
Sunshine Act of 1976, Pub. L. No. 94-409, 90
Stat. 1241 (codified at 5 U.S.C.A. § 552b); and
the Electronic Freedom of Information Act of
1996, Pub. L. No. 104-231, 110 Stat. 2422
(codified as amended at 5 U.S.C.A. § 552).
In 2005 the Judiciary Committee of the
House of Representatives began collaborative
research under the Administrative Law, Process
and Procedure Project, intended to review the
efficacy of federal
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND
PROCEDURE
. Several studies were commenced,
including the solicitation of comments from
public agencies, law schools, the
AMERICAN BAR
ASSOCIATION
, and several other organizations.
One important study, conducted by the
CON-

previous Executive Order 13233 from the Bush
administration that had severely restricted
release to the public of presidential records. At
that time, Obama signed two other memoranda
focusing on transparency and openness. One
directed the attorney general to issue new
guidelines to agencies for compl ying with the
letter and spirit of the FOIA. In the other,
Obama asked three senior officials to produce
an “open government” directive within the first
120 days of the administration. Said Obama,
“[T]he old rules said that if there was a
defensible argument for not disclosing some-
thing to the American peop le, then it should
not be disclosed. That era is now over. Starting
today, every agency and department should
know that this administration stands on the side
not of those who seek to withhold information
but those who seek to make it known.”
FURTHER READINGS
Allen, William H. 1986. “The Durability of the Administra-
tive Procedure Act.” Virginia Law Review 235.
Bonfield, Arthur Earl. 1986. “The Federal APA and State
Administrative Law.” Virginia Law Review 297.
“Executive Order 13489 of January 21, 2009.” Presidential
Documents, Federal Register, Vol. 74, No. 15, January
26, 2009. Also available at http://edocket.access.gpo.
gov/2009/pdf/E-9-1712.pdf
Funk, William F., and Richard H. Seamon. 2009. Adminis-
trative Law: Examples and Explanations. 3d ed. New

of administration for persons who have died
INTESTATE.
An executor differs from an administrator
in that he or she is named in the decedent’s will
to manage the estate. If an executor dies while
performing these duties, a court will appoint an
administrator de bonis non cum testamen to
annexo (Latin for “of the goods not [already]
administered upon with the will annexed”)to
complete the distribution of the decede nt’s
estate. This term is often abbreviated: adminis-
trator d.b.n.c.t.a.
ADMIRALTY AND MARITIME LAW
A field of law relating to, and arising from, the
practice of the admiralty courts (tribunals that
exercise jurisdiction over all contracts, torts,
offenses, or injuries within maritime law) that
regulates and settles special problems associated
with sea navigation and commerce.
History of Admiralty and Maritime Law
The life of the mariner, spent far away from the
stability of land, has long been considered an
exotic one of travel, romance, and danger. Stories
of pirates, mutinies, lashings, and hasty trials—
many of them true—illustrate the peculiar,
isolated nature of the maritime existence. In
modern times, the practice of shipping goods by
sea has become more civil, but the law still gives
maritime activities special treatment by acknowl-
edging the unique conflicts and difficulties

Rules of
CIVIL PROCEDURE that brought admiralty
and maritime procedural rules into accord with
those used in other civil suits. The substantive
maritime law, however, has remained intact.
Admiralty and Maritime Law in the
Early 2000s
The terms admiralty and maritime law are
sometimes used interchangeably, but admiralty
originally referred to a specific court in England
and the American colonies that had jurisdiction
over torts and contracts on the high seas,
whereas substantive maritime law developed
through the expansion of admiralty court
jurisdiction to include all activities on the high
seas and similar activities on
NAVIGABLE WATERS.
Because water commerce and navigation
often involve foreign nations, much of the U.S.
maritime law has evolved in concert with the
maritime laws of other countries. The federal
statutes that address maritime issues are often
customized U.S. versions of the convention
resolutions or treaties of international maritime
law. The
UNITED NATIONS organizes and prepares
these conventions and treaties through branches
such as the International Maritime Organiza-
tion and the International Labor Organization,
which prepares conventions on the health,

Assigning responsibility for onboard
NEGLI-
GENCE
was a long-standing problem, but the
JONES ACT of 1920 (46 U.S.C.A. § 688 et seq.)
solidifies the right of sailors to recover from an
employer for injuries resulting from the negli-
gence of the employer, a master, or another
crew member. The 1920 Death on High Seas
Act (46 App. U.S.C.A. § 761 et seq.) allows
recovery by the beneficiaries of a sailor’s estate
when the sailor dies by negligence, default, or
wrongful act on the high seas “beyond a marine
league from the shore of any state [territory or
dependency].” A marine league is one-twentieth
of a degree of latitude, or three miles.
Accidents suffered by nonmaritime persons
on docks, piers, wharfs, or bridges do not qualify
for the application of maritime law principles.
However, personal injuries suffered while indi-
viduals were aboard a ship or as a result of an
air-to-water airplane crash are considered within
the jurisdiction of admiralty law.
The Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’
Compensation Act (33 U.S.C.A. § 901 et seq.
[1927]) sets up a federal system to compensate
injured maritime workers who do not sail.
Through the Federal Office of Workers’ Com-
pensation Programs, employees such as steve-
dores (workers who load and unload ships) and

vessel suppliers and servicers, and the liabilities
arising from collisions, towage, pilotage, and
groundings. The
MARITIME LIEN Act (46 U.S.C.A.
§§ 31341–31343 [1920]) gives a
LIEN to any
person who, upon the order of the ship owner,
furnishes repairs, supplies, towage, use of dry
dock or marine railway, or other necessaries to
any vessel, without allegation or proof that
credit was given. The Ship Mortgage Act (46 U.
S.C.A. §§ 31301–31330 [1920]) regulates the
mortgages on ships registered in the United
States, and also provides for enforcement of the
maritime liens obtained through the Maritime
Lien Act.
In case of collision or other damage to a
vessel, an
IN REM proceeding is often used to
recover
DAMAGES. An in rem action is a lawsuit
brought against an offending thing (in admiralty,
usually the ship), whereas an
IN PERSONAM action
is a suit brought against a person. Rule C of the
Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and
Maritime Claims (1985) provides necessary
details for the
SEIZURE of an offending owner’s
vessel or property if a

When no applicable federal statute exists,
the governing law of a maritime case will be the
uniform laws as expounded by the U.S.
Supreme Court and applicable to all torts and
contracts, whether the case is tried in federal or
state court. Maritime case law—not the general
common law—will govern a contract dispute
only if the subject matter of the co ntract
pertained to water commerce. Maritime pre-
cedents will govern a tort claim only if the
negligent or reckless actions involved commer-
cial activity on navigable waters.
Charter parties are often a topic of concern
in maritime law. A charter party, or charter, is an
agreement among a shipowner, a crew (the
charterer), and the owner of the goods to be
transported. Charter parties come in three
types: time, voyage, and demise. A time charter
is the lease of a ship to a charterer for a specified
period of time. A voyage charter is the lease of a
ship for a specific number of voyages. A demise
charter (so called because the shipowner effec-
tively relinquishes ownership for a certain
period, causing a “demise” in ownership interest)
is usually a bareboat charter, which means that
the charterer supplies the master and crew for
the ship. Other demise charters provide that the
shipowner’s master and crew take charge of the
vessel.
In contrast to the usual contract practice of

included two crossings of the equator, hull
damage, and lengthy repairs, the Ioannis came
into port at Norfolk, Virginia, on May 3, 1941.
En route, the tobacco had been damaged, much
of the olive oil had leaked from its drums, and
the cheese was “‘[m]elted with a terrible stench,
and worthless.’”
Despite the Ioannis’s brave participation in
wartime activities, the intended recipients (con-
signees) of the tobacco and olive oil sued the
Ioannis and were able to recover for the losses
suffered as a result of the damage. However, on
the subject of the cheese, the court refused to
allow recovery by Lekas and Drivas, which had
consigned the cheese to itself.
Lekas argued that the crew of the Ioannis
was negligent in storing the cheese in the
structure at the stern above the main deck,
known as the poop. According to Lekas, it was
inappropriate for the cheese to be in the poop.
The poop lacked ventilation, and it was not
refrigerated. However, according to the bill of
lading between Lekas and the Ioannis, special
cooling was not necessary and had not be en
contracted for. The cheese was also stored on
lighters (large, flat-bottomed barges used for
loading and unloading ships) during the 35 days
needed for repairs of the Ioannis, and Lekas
claimed that this storage was improper. But
because wartime conditions were responsible

marine environment, prevent damage to struc-
tures on or adjacent to navigable waters, and
ensure compliance with vessel operation and
safety standards. The trial court dismissed the
case, reasoning that the ordinance was neither
preempted by, nor in conflict with, the federal
statute.
On appeal, the Ninth
CIRCUIT COURT of
Appeals agreed that the Santa Barbara ordi-
nance was not in conflict with the PWSA,
because the federal act was not intended to limit
a municipality’s control over its local shores.
The appeals court also rejected the proposition
that the enactment of the PWSA implicitly
foreclosed the enactment of similar ordinances
by municipalities, and Santa Barbara’s control
over the Stearns Wharf was complete.
Admiralty and maritime matters will always
deserve laws carefully crafted to suit the
complexity and urgency of maritime endeavors.
The international nature of high-seas navigation
and its attendant perils demand no less. Federal,
state, and local control of navigable waters can
affect everyone from the largest charter party to
a private boat owner.
FURTHER READINGS
Healy, Nicholas J., and David J. Sharpe. 2006. Cases and
Materials on Admiralty. 4th ed. Eagan, MN: West.
Lucas, Jo Desha. 2003. Admiralty: Cases and Materials.

facts that are inconsistent with the par ty’s claims
in the controversy are true.
In a lawsuit over whether a
DEFENDANT neg-
ligently drove a car into the
PLAINTIFF pedestrian,
the defendant’s apology to the plaintiff and
payment of the plaintiff ’s medical bills are
admissions that may be introduced as evidence
against the defendant.
An admission may be express, such as a
written or verbal statement by a person con-
cerning the t ruth, or it may be implied by a
person’s conduct. If someone fails to deny
certain assertions which, if false, would be
denied by any
REASONABLE PERSON, such failure
indicates that the person has accepted the truth
of the allegations.
An admission is not the same as a confes-
sion. A confession is an acknowledgment of
guilt in a criminal case. Admissions usually
apply to civil matters; in criminal cases they
apply only to matters of fact that do not involve
criminal intent.
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
124 ADMISSIBLE
Admissions are used primarily as a method
of disc overy, as a pleading device, and as
evidence in a trial.

RESPONSIVE PLEADING is required are admitted if
they are not denied in the responsive pleading.
If a party has made an admission in a pleading
that has subsequently been amended, the
pleading containing the admission will be
admissible as evidence in the case. In civil
actions any offers to
SETTLE the case cannot be
admitted into evidence.
A plea of guilty in a criminal case may
usually be shown as an admission in a later civil
or criminal proceeding, but it is not conclusive.
The defendant may explain the circumstances
that brought it about, such as a
PLEA BARGAINING
deal. Any admissions or offers to plead guilty
during the plea-bargaining process are
INADMIS-
SIBLE
as evidence. Many courts refuse to admit
a guilty plea to a traffic offense as evidence
because many people plead guilty to avoid
wasting their time and money by appearing in
traffic court. A guilty plea that has subsequently
been withdrawn and followed by a plea of not
guilty cannot be used as an admission in either a
criminal or civil case. It is considered an
unreliable admission that has a potentially
prejudicial effect on the opportunity of the
defendant to get a fair trial.

mental statements about themse lves unless they
are true. Such an admission is considered an
exception to the hearsay rule and, therefore, can
be used as evidence in a lawsuit.
ADMISSION TO THE BAR
The procedure that governs the authorization of
attorneys to pra ctice law before the state and
federal courts.
Statutes, rules, and regulations governing
admission to practice law have been enacted to
protect the
PUBLIC INTEREST, in terms of prevent-
ing the victimization of clients by incompetent
practition ers. The courts have inherent power
to promulgate reasonable rules and regula-
tions for
ADMISSION TO THE BAR. Although this
authority is vested exclusively in the courts,
the legislature can, subject to constitutional
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
ADMISSION TO THE BAR 125
limitations, issue reasonable rules and regula-
tions governing bar admission provided they
do not conflict with judicial pronouncements.
The highest state court administers the
admission of applicants to the state bar, usually
requiring successful completion of a bar exami-
nation and evidence of good moral character.
With respect to admission to the federal bar,
federal district courts are empowered to issue

possession. The person must be of good
character in terms of both his or her private
and professional lives and complete the speci-
fied procedures, including taking or subscribing
the following oath: “I, [name], do solemnly
swear (or affirm) that as an attorney and as a
counselor of this court I will conduct myself
uprightly, and according to law, and that I will
support the Constitution of the United State s.”
In some instances, a particular board is
empowered to promulgate rules pertaining to
applicants seeking to practice before it as
attorneys. For example, the
SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
has implied authority
under its general statutory power to determine
qualifications for attorneys practicing before it.
Under federal law, the commissioner of
PATENTS
and trademarks, subject to the approval of the
secretary of commerce, can promulgate regula-
tions governing the recognition and conduct of
attorneys appearing before the U.S.
PATENT AND
TRADEMARK OFFICE
.
Qualifications for admission to the bar must
be rationally related to the applicant’sfitnessto
practice law; therefore, a state cannot prevent a

Number of admissions
Year
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000
49,151
49,127
50,270
53,871
54,618
ILLUSTRATION BY GGS
CREATIVE RESOURCES.
REPRODUCED BY
PERMISSION OF GALE,
A PART OF CENGAGE
LEARNING.
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3
RD E DITION
126 ADMISSION TO THE BAR
moral f itness. In some cases, an applicant has
been rejected for want of good moral character
becauseheorshehasmadefalsestatementsor
concealed material f acts in the application for
admission or in other legal documents. In other
cases, the withholding or falsification on the
application of minor matters has been viewed as
having no effect on an evaluation of character;

In rare cases, an attorney who has been disbarred
or suspended can take a special bar examination
for reinstatement. In 2008 only 20 disbarred or
suspended attorneys across the U.S. took a
reinstatement exam (seven, or 35 percent, passed).
Attorneys from other states can be admitted
to prac tice in the state without examination
upon providing the required proof of pract ice
in another state that has reciprocity provisions,
pursuant to which an attorney licensed in one
state can be admitted to the bar of another state,
if the first state grants
RECIPROCAL rights to
attorneys admitted to practice in the other state.
Under the device of
PRO HAC VICE, an attorney
can be admitted to practice in a jurisdiction
without having to take the bar examination, but
only on a limited basis and only for a particular
case. Such an attorney must be a member in
good standing of a bar of other states or
countries.
In order to practice law, an attorney must
obtain a certificate or license, which is a
privilege rather than a
PROPERTY RIGHT. Attorneys
must also comply with the court rules or
statutes governing the registration system,
which is used to maintain a current list of all
attorneys authorized to practice law in the state.

American Bar Association (ABA), 2009. “Legal Education
and Bar Admissions 2008 Statistics.” Available online at
http://www.abanet.org/legaled/statistics/charts/stats%
20-%201.pdf; website home page: http://www.abanet.
org/ (accessed August 5, 2009)
American Bar Association Publishing Company. 2009. Rules
for Admission to the Bar in the Several States and
Territories of the United States. Charleston, SC: BibioLife
LLC.
Glen, Kristin Booth. 2002. “When and Where We Enter:
Rethinking Admission to the Legal Profession.”
Columbia Law Review 102 (October): 1696–1740.
Moeser, Erica. 2002. “Bar Admission in the United States
2001: Framing the Discussion for Response to
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
ADMISSION TO THE BAR 127