Talk:Special master

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Anthony Levandowski#Lawsuit|Waymo v. Uber]] The anchor (#Lawsuit) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Criticism of Special Masters

Just wanted to point out a rather interesting section of this article. If you read the main body of this article, it says that special masters are often criticised as being tools of an overreaching and overly powerful judicial branch. The response to those asserions in the the courts often find the actions of the special master valid

Am I the only one who sees the irony? Kiyae (talk) 09:24, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conflation of Special Masters and Masters in England & Wales

This article implies that the Masters of the High Court in England & Wales are equivalent to the description of "Special Masters" provided. They most certainly are not. They excercise full judicial powers in making procedural and costs orders in complex cases.

Urbanmyth139 —Preceding undated comment was added at 17:26, 12 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Extent of usage

"US-only legal concept" is not accurate since Special masters have existed in England for several centuries. Their equivalents probably exist in other jurisdictions influenced by the legal system of England and Wales.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 12:12, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't know about US only however an American court appointed official is in no way equivalent either in rank or role as a High Court Judge appointed as a master in the High Court or one of its divisions. Sorry mate, two entirely separate concepts and the England & Wales section removed to avoid the confusion. Chris (talk) 21:25, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Special master. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121016202221/http://www.justice.gov/final_report.pdf to http://www.justice.gov/final_report.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:38, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]