Legal Definitions - in banco

In banco (pronounced "in BAHN-koh") is a Latin term, often used interchangeably with the French term en banc (pronounced "ahn BAHNK"). Both phrases mean "on the bench" or "by the full court."

When a court hears a case in banco or en banc, it means that all the judges of that particular court participate in the hearing and decision, rather than the usual smaller panel of judges. This practice is most common in appellate courts, especially federal circuit courts of appeals and state supreme courts.

Courts typically decide to hear a case in banco for several reasons:

• To resolve a conflict between decisions made by different smaller panels of judges within the same court.
• To address a case of exceptional importance or complexity, often involving significant constitutional questions or matters of broad public policy.
• To ensure a uniform application of the law across the entire jurisdiction of the court.

Here are some examples illustrating the application of "in banco":

• Example 1 (Federal Circuit Court Rehearing): The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit initially heard a complex civil rights case with a three-judge panel. The panel's decision was highly controversial and created a perceived conflict with a previous ruling by another panel in the same circuit. To resolve this internal inconsistency and provide a definitive interpretation of the law for the entire circuit, the court voted to rehear the case en banc. This meant all active judges of the Fifth Circuit participated in the re-argument and issued a new, binding decision.

  Explanation: This illustrates "in banco" because the entire body of judges of the appellate court convened to decide the case, rather than just a small subset, specifically to address a significant legal conflict within the court's jurisdiction and ensure legal uniformity.

• Example 2 (State Supreme Court Constitutional Challenge): A state's highest court, often called the Supreme Court, was presented with a legal challenge to the constitutionality of a newly enacted state law regulating campaign finance. Given the profound impact this decision would have on political processes and free speech rights across the state, the Chief Justice determined that the matter should be heard in banco. Consequently, all seven justices of the state's Supreme Court sat together to hear the arguments and deliberate on the case, ensuring a comprehensive and authoritative ruling.

  Explanation: Here, "in banco" applies because the full complement of judges on the state's highest court heard and decided a case of major public importance, ensuring the most authoritative ruling possible from that judicial body.

• Example 3 (Specialized Appellate Court): The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which specializes in patent law, was faced with a groundbreaking case involving the patentability of certain artificial intelligence algorithms. The legal questions were novel, highly technical, and had the potential to reshape an entire industry. Recognizing the broad implications and the need for a consistent legal framework, the court opted to hear the case en banc, bringing together all its judges to establish a comprehensive and unified precedent for this emerging field.

  Explanation: This example demonstrates "en banc" in a specialized appellate court context, where all judges participated to address a novel and impactful legal issue, aiming for a definitive and unified ruling that would guide future cases in that specialized area.