of pleading, leaving the knowledge of practice to be acquired

in a lawyer's office.

Utah School of Law:

Time too short for much work of that character.

Vanderbilt University:

No definite opinion.

Wake Forest Law School:

Good where feasible but cannot be done by schools not in centers of considerable litigation.

Washburn Law School:

We believe it should be emphasized throughout the law school curriculum.

Washington College of Law:

No form of legal aid connected with the school.

Washington & Lee University:

Have had no experience with this but in general should think a very little would be enough.

Washington University School of Law:

We find it useful to have pleadings, briefs, arguments and opinions prepared in cases, also contracts, deeds and other instruments drawn.

Webster College of Law:

We believe that law schools should instruct students in the use of law books by familarizing them with the ordinary classification of the law, with the relation to one another of text books, digests, encyclopedias and reports, and the scope of each.

Western Reserve University:

Clinical work should be a small part of a law school course.

West Virginia University:

Clinical work, strictly so considered, i. e., experience in doing actual legal work is desirable but its possibilities are limited to law schools located in cities.

Yale University:

When law schools are located in cities, "clinical" experience may profitably be obtained through volunteer service in legal aid societies. Law Schools have paid too little attention to practice and procedure courses and to the drafting of instruments.

The President:

We will now have the report of the Committee on the Revision of the Civil Practice, of which Judge Rodenbeck is chairman.

Adelbert Moot, of Buffalo:

Mr. President and Gentlemen. At the request of Judge Rodenbeck, I present the report of the committee. The Statutory Consolidation Committee, through the great help afforded by Judge Rodenbeck, has completed a revision of the practice. We have a simple Practice Act of 42 sections, and about 315 rules of court, changed from the present rules as little as possible. We have taken the substantive law out of the code and have put it where we think it belongs. So, in a real property case, if you take the Real Property Act, which you will find in McKinney's edition of the General Laws of the State, you will have and the Practice Act and rules, at your command just what you want. A lawyer who has to go out in the country on a case may put the Practice Act and

the Rules of Court and the particular statute in his bag, and he has practically all the law on the subject—a library right with him.

Now, this is the report that is about to be laid before the Legislature. At the same time, the Legislature will have another report before it, probably, the report of the Joint Committee; which is reporting a code. The numbers run up to about 2,200, but as a matter of fact I think the sections will number only about 1,600. The rules run into very high numbers, but when counted I think it will be found that the number of rules is not so great as the numbers would seem to indicate.

Lawyers will have this year the work of the Joint Committee, laying before them a sort of revision of the present code, in which some of the substantive law is taken out and put into the General Laws, and some of the code sections have been kept as rules. They will also have before them our Practice Act of 42 sections and our slightly revised rules, about 315 in number. Then they can take their choice.

I, therefore, present this report, Sir, and move its acceptance and that it be placed on file. It reads as follows:

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON THE REVISION OF THE CIVIL PRACTICE

To the New York State Bar Association:

Your Committee on the Revision of the Civil Practice beg to report as follows:

The active work on the revision of the civil practice dates back to the work of a joint committee of the Legislature of 1900, of which the chairman of this Committee was chairman. The report formulated by that Committee was submitted to various bar associations or law committees thereof for

consideration, and among the endorsements secured was one from this Association, in which it reiterated, however, "its preference that the details of practice should be in the form of rules of court."

In 1904, by chapter 664 of the laws of that year, the board of statutory consolidation was created, which, besides being entrusted with the work of consolidating the general statutes, was directed to report for enactment such amendments as it might deem proper and necessary to condense and simplify the existing practice and as would adapt the procedure to existing conditions.

This board reported a consolidation of the general statutes, which was adopted in 1909.

In 1912 the board was continued and directed to report to the Legislature a plan for the classification, consolidation and simplification of the civil practice in the courts of the State.

In 1913 the board reported its plan to the Legislature, and, by chapter 713 of the laws of that year, the board was authorized and directed to prepare and present to the Legislature "a practice act, rules of court and short forms," as recommended by the board in its report.

This act provides that the practice act "shall be confined to the statement of fundamental and jurisdictional matters relating to procedure and practice, substantive law and special practice being eliminated from the Code of Civil Procedure and incorporated in appropriate consolidated laws or in new statutes."

The report of the board, in accordance with this statutory direction, was made to the Legislature in 1915, and since that time has been under consideration by the Legislature and various bar associations of the State or committees thereof.

The plan of a short practice act provided in the statute of 1913, and recommended in the report of the board, has been approved by this Association, which, by a resolution adopted in 1916, approved of the general features of the report of the board.

Your Committee takes this opportunity of reiterating and reaffirming its conviction that the reform of procedure in this State lies in the direction of a short practice act supplemented by rules of court.

The board has prepared and is ready to present to the present Legislature a revision of its report, particularly with reference to its practice act and the distribution of substantive matter, and your Committee is advised that the joint committee of the Legislature, which has been working upon this subject, is also prepared to present to the Legislature a revision of the Code of Civil Procedure.

These two reports are now before the Legislature and this Association for such action as they may deem proper.

Respectfully submitted,

ADOLPH J. RODENBECK,

Chairman.

JOHN G. MILBURN,

Dated, January 17, 1919.

ADELBERT MOOT,

CHARLES A. COLLIN.

A motion to accept and file the report was duly seconded and carried.

The President:

Next we will take up the report of the Committee to Examine the Practice Act, prepared by the Board of Statutory Consolidation, of which Committee Mr. Taft is chairman.