1. Id. rule 4321 (1963).
2. E.g., “The order of reference to the master may specify or limit his powers and may direct him to report only upon particular issues or to do or perform particular acts or to receive and report evidence only.” Alaska R. Civ. P. 53(b).
3. This observation is supported, perhaps, by a comparison of the reference procedure with judicial arbitration. Under the Judicial Arbitration Act (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 1141.10-.32 (West Cum. Supp. 1981)) about 24,000 suits were diverted from the regular court system during the program's first year of operation, as compared with only a few hundred cases diverted each year by the reference procedure. Yet, a recent study suggests that the reduction in court congestion effected by judicial arbitration may not be as substantial as proponents of the program had hoped. Deborah R. Hensler, Albert J. Lipson, & Elizabeth S. Rolph, Judicial Arbitration in California: The First Year 93–94 (Santa Monica, Cal.: Institute for Civil Justice, Rand Corp., 1981).
4. Ala. R. Civ. P. 53.
5. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 638–645 (West 1976 & Cum. Supp. 1981) (enacted 1872).