Home

News

Useful Links

Case In Point

Downloads

FAQ

Fresh Justice is the Sweetest

3/11/2008

At any time of the year, you can read stories in the national media about courts struggling with burgeoning dockets. In one county in North Carolina, the fire marshal determined that the crowds waiting “shoulder to shoulder” in the halls and down the stairways of the courthouse posed a fire hazard. In another county in Ohio, five death penalty cases were reassigned from one judge to another, prompting a local prosecutor to blame the judge for “excessive and inexcusable” delay. In Texas, a consumer watchdog organization released a new report called Justice Delayed that addressed the growing backlog of cases at the Texas Supreme Court. Stories about prison and jail overcrowding are a regular feature in the media of almost every urban area in the country.

Why should you care? Because effective caseflow management is at the heart of delivering justice. A succinct statement of why caseflow management is critical is set forth in A National Agenda for Prompt and Affordable Justice in the 21st Century:

Fair and expeditious dispute resolution processes, accessible to all, are the foundation of justice in a free society. Unnecessary court delay undermines public trust in the rule of law, erodes confidence in the court system, and draws into question the efficacy of courts as an institution of government. Excessive litigation costs are a barricade restricting or completely blocking access to justice for many Americans.

Fundamental legal protections become empty promises if courts cannot consistently deliver prompt and affordable justice. Even the highest quality legal decisions are of little value if rendered long after the event. Public safety may be threatened when criminal cases take longer than necessary. Successful rehabilitation or treatment becomes less likely with the passage of time between the commission of the act and the commencement of the correction.

In its Core Competency Curriculum Guidelines, the National Association for Court Management's Professional and Development Advisory Committee describes the importance of caseflow management as:

Effective caseflow management makes justice possible both in individual cases and across judicial systems and courts, both trial and appellate. It helps ensure that every litigant receives procedural due process and equal protection.

The quality of justice is enhanced when the [administration of the court is organized] around direct requirements of effective caseflow and trial management…Caseflow management is a process by which courts convert their "input" (cases) into "output" (dispositions). The quality of this process determines how well courts achieve their most fundamental and substantive objectives and purposes. Properly understood caseflow management is the absolute heart of court management.

We have heard for years that “justice delayed is justice denied.” Another way to express that sentiment was written by then United States Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger in his foreword to the ABA's 1986 Defeating Delay publication:

On the occasion of his ascending the bench in England in 1614, Frances Bacon observed, "fresh justice is the sweetest." Nearly three centuries later, all who work in our court systems – judges, bars, administrators and staff – continue to strive to deliver the best quality of justice at the least cost in the shortest time.

The American Bar Association’s 1984 report entitled Attacking Litigation Cost and Delay states:

How (state trial) courts perform is critical; their success or failure inspires or undermines the confidence in our entire judicial system. Today, respect for our judicial system has been seriously eroded; trial court litigation is especially seen as unnecessarily time-consuming and expensive.

The National Center for State Courts (NCSC) 1988 publication Changing Times in Trial Courts/Caseflow Management and Delay Reduction in Urban Trial Courts by Dr. Barry Mahoney is a comprehensive example of the value of research studying specific courts to better understand the impact of caseflow management. Some of the principle findings from Changing Times set forth beginning on page 192 are sumarized as follows:

1. Some urban trial courts handle their entire caseloads very expeditiously.

2. The pace of civil and criminal litigation is not clearly correlated with the size of the court, population of jurisdiction, composition of the caseload, per-judge caseloads, or the percentages of cases that proceed to jury trial.

3. The presence of an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) program, whether mandatory or voluntary, is not correlated with efficiency of civil case processing.

4. The general type of calendaring or case assignment system used in a jurisdiction (i.e. master calendar, individual calendar, or hybrid) does not appear to be a decisive factor determining case processing times.

5. On the civil side, implementation by the court of key concepts of caseflow management is strongly correlated with appropriate case processing times.

6. On the criminal side, police and prosecutorial practices have a great impact on overall case processing times. Courts with speedy felony case processing times are generally ones in which both the prosecutor’s office and the court have a strong commitment to case processing within time standards and have worked cooperatively to develop and maintain efficient procedures.

7. The size of the pending caseload, in relation to annual disposition, is strongly association with the pace of litigation. Slow courts are generally backlogged courts.

8. The degree and nature of involvement of state-level leaders in addressing effective caseflow management has varied widely. In some states, the leadership of the chief justice, state supreme court, and state court administrator have been important factors in focusing attention on effective caseflow management. State-level leadership and support have played critical roles in several successful programs.

9. Ultimately, it is essential to have local-level leadership and commitment in order to achieve case processing time goals and institutionalize effective caseflow management practices in trial courts.

The number of organizations who have recognized the importance of caseflow management are many and the resources and studies on the subject are plentiful. The National Judicial College has developed a course, Effective Caseflow Management, which will help you create and implement a plan of action to improve your system. Click here for information about Effective Caseflow Management, August 24 – 28, 2008, Bar Harbor, Maine.