CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION NONCREDIT CERTIFICATE PROGRAM NACM Annual Conference

Transcription

1 CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION NONCREDIT CERTIFICATE PROGRAM 2014 NACM Annual Conference

2 FACULTY Janet G. Cornell Court Administration Consultant Marcus W. Reinkensmeyer Court Services Director Arizona Supreme Court 2

3 CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES At the end of this course participants will be able to: describe the purposes of courts, articulate the basic principles of caseflow management, explain how the purposes of courts is accomplished through effective caseflow management, list the characteristics of successful caseflow management systems, describe the impact of delay on the quality of justice, and recognize different case assignment options 3

4 MONDAY, JULY 14 TH, 2014: 10:15 AM 11:30 AM Introduction to Caseflow Management Defining Key Concepts and Terms Reflecting on the Purposes of Courts Exercise/Activity 4

5 CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT What is caseflow management? What does it mean? What is YOUR position and how does it relate to caseflow? Create a definition of Caseflow Management What Why How When Where Who 5

6 WHY IS MANAGEMENT OF CASES IMPORTANT? The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in (US Constitution, Art. III) Government Role Public Expectation 6

7 A SELF ASSESSMENT OF CASEFLOW Consider YOUR Court Do a self-assessment of caseflow techniques Rank YOUR priorities to improve or enhance Debrief 7

8 CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT RATE YOUR COURT T F Question T F 1. Our court leadership (presiding judge/judges, administrator) takes a leadership role in caseflow management. T F 2. Our court has a (published) mission and vision statement. My Priority To Improve 1 (hi) to 5 (lo) T F 3. Our court has a caseflow management policy, plan or process. T F 4. We have and use case processing standards and goals. T F 5. Our court measures case age from filing to disposition. T F 6. My court uses early case review. T F 7. The judges limit the number of continuances. T F 8. My court publishes and uses data and case processing performance measures. T F 9. Our court meets regularly with justice system stakeholders/partners. 8

9 Leadership CASEFLOW CONCEPTS Early continuous court intervention Participation of stakeholders All court staff aware Use of court data, information and measures Holding parties accountable- continuance management Communication and information 9

10 WORDS AND TERMS What words and terms do we use about managing cases? What terminology have YOU used in your court? Write a list of at least 5 words you have heard 10

11 WORDS From Larson, cartoonist 11

12 CASEFLOW TERMS Principles Assignment systems Calendar/scheduling systems Time standards Inventory Backlog reduction Delay reduction Judicial control Early control Meaningful event Case supervision Event outcome Active Inactive Next available date Age of pending cases Time to disposition Continuance policy Caseflow management policy Performance goals DCM ADR 12

13 TERMINOLOGY A SAMPLING Caseflow management Rules, policies Orders, administrative orders Standards, goals, deadlines Calendars, court date, court event, court appearance Calendar and judge assignment systems Jury trial, bench trial, default Continuances (hold-overs, adjournments, recesses) Warrants, quashing, motions Adjudication Clearance rate Time to disposition, timely DCM, ADR, mediation, arbitration, settlement, diversion 13

14 COURTS EXIST TO Why do courts exist? What is it that courts perform? How are they different from: Other government entities? Private companies? 14

15 HOW DO COURTS AFFECT Consider how our courts affect these: Society Activities Groups Daily life 15

16 The purposes of courts PURPOSES OF COURTS gives us background illustrates one view of why courts exist Professor Ernie Friesen created these 16

17 THE PURPOSES (AND ROLES) OF COURTS 1. Individual justice in individual cases 2. Appearance of individual justice in individual cases 3. Forum for resolution of disputes 4. Protection of individuals from the arbitrary use of governmental power Ernie Friesen 17

18 THE PURPOSES (AND ROLES) OF COURTS 5. Formal record of legal status 6. Deter criminal behavior 7. Rehabilitate persons convicted of crimes 8. Separate some convicted persons from society Ernie Friesen 18

19 DO INDIVIDUAL JUSTICE IN INDIVIDUAL CASES Justice meted out on a case by case basis (Wikipedia) Affected by: Litigant expectations Technology System changes Court relevance 19

20 APPEAR TO DO JUSTICE IN CASES The Court s power lies in legitimacy a product of perception peoples acceptance of the judiciary as able to determine what the law means and declare what it demands. The court must take care to speak and Act in ways that allow people to Accept its decisions Harvard Law Review

21 PROVIDE FORUM: RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES a system and forum, facilitated by the legal system, to resolve disagreements, which is formal, governed by rules,is adversarial in nature, with evaluation of the case facts, and a binding decision 21

22 PROTECT FROM ARBITRARY USE OF POWER Individual rights Government actions 22

23 PROVIDE FORMAL RECORD OF LEGAL STATUS Written document? Electronic transmission? Format? 23

24 DETER CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR Role of Court actions and rulings? Impacts from court cases? 24

25 REHABILITATE PERSONS CONVICTED OF CRIMES What is court role in rehabilitation? 25

26 SEPARATE PERSONS CONVICTED OF CRIME Detention, incarceration or release orders sometimes create court visibility. 26

27 LINKING PURPOSES TO DAILY OPERATIONS What stands out from these purposes? What themes are present in our traditional court purposes? Which purpose is the most important? Are any purposes missing from list? How do the purposes impact our lives? Can we link daily court activities to the purposes? 27

28 MONDAY, JULY 14TH, 2014: 1:15 PM 2:15 PM Impact of Delay on the Purposes of Courts Impact of Delay on the Quality of Justice Caseflow Management Origins and Evolution Exercise/Activity 28

29 IMPACT OF DELAY 29

30 IMPACT OF DELAY 30

31 ORIGINS OF CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT Pre 1950 in US Courts External dominance administration Disorganized Unprofessional Poorly managed Case scheduling left to attorneys Growing delays in handling of cases Tobin, Creating the Judicial Branch: The Unfinished Reform 31

32 1950- TO CURRENT DAY Operation as branch of government Professionalization: skills, leadership American Bar Association interest, research Court responsibility for managing cases Use of policies, procedures, rules Court performance metrics Accountability, accessibility, transparency 32

33 CURRENT THINGS IMPACTING CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT? 33

34 WHAT ARE CURRENT ISSUES AFFECTING CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Brainstorm and list Real life challenges for caseflow management Work in teams Write on flipchart Report out 34

35 COMPETING PRESSURES Customer expectation & demand Service elimination or consolidation Increasing & tighter controls Fiscal challenges Public perceptions Rules and policies Caseflow management Staffing, hiring, retention, morale Task Complexity Reactive systems 35

36 ONE VIEW OF THE FUTURE - THE POSSIBLE Control Dare Adaptability Partners Digital Natives From Alec Ross, Sr. Advisor- Innovation, US Sec y. of State Risk & Failure 37

37 CURRENT/EMERGING ISSUES Culture Role of court Importance of linking to purposes Courtwide goals and practices Change management Better use of judicial resources Importance of time standards Impacts of self represented litigants (SRL) Accountability and transparency Use of technology 37

38 24 CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT SKILLS Court purposes and vision Purposes and effective case management Leadership teams and system-wide effectiveness Change and project management Technology Personal intervention NACM Core Competency Caseflow Management 38

39 IMPROVING CASEFLOW Early continuous judicial supervision Credible hearing/trial dates Control of continuances Time standards and goals Information system Consultation with Bar and justice agencies BJA: Improving Criminal Caseflow, M Solomon 39

40 CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES Overall and intermediate time standards Caseflow management concepts Case status categories Leadership and governance Court culture Data quality Performance measures Monitoring progress Adapted from CourtMD, National Center for State Courts 40

41 HOW TO SUCCEED? Have a strong role model ( cheer leader ) Use peer pressure Start small and build Ensure and maintain a system wide view/goal Have good data Train on expectations 41

42 CASEFLOW LEADERSHIP BASICS Goals Rules Communication Training Reporting system(s) Monitoring 42

43 COURTS THAT SUCCEED Courts That Succeed: Six Profiles of Successful Courts, Hewitt, Gallas, Mahoney 43

44 RECENT DIAGNOSTICS ON CASEFLOW Use of time standards and intermediate goals Applying caseflow management concepts Promoting leadership and governance Focusing on case type needs Leveraging court culture and management Using data: performance measures Using data: monitoring and evaluating From National Center for State Courts CourtMD See 39

45 MONDAY, JULY 14TH, 2014: 2:30 PM 3:30 PM Caseflow Management Systems Exercise/Activity 45

46 McCloy

47 This premium on speed is killing a system that was not broken to begin with. the goal is meeting numerical benchmarks. What value is there in meeting a quota at the cost of justice? Arizona Attorneys for Criminal Justice

48 CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT SYSTEM The timely movement of cases from filing to disposition, regardless of the type of disposition. The cases proceed through a defined process intended to maximize the opportunity for settlement or trial preparation by ensuring lawyer preparedness. It assumes that there are values and performance standards that guide the decision-making Stephen V. Bouch 48

49 CASE MANAGEMENT Under the control and direction of the court, not the lawyers or litigants. This concept has been recognized: ABA Standards for Trial Courts and Delay Reduction Trial Court Performance Standards NACM Core Competencies Stephen V. Bouch 49

50 DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL COURT PERFORMANCE s 1980s Caseflow Mgmt Principl Time Standards Trial Court Performc Standards Staff & Efficiency Assessmt Statistical Reporting Standrds NACM Core Comp. CourTools High PerformcC ourts Principles - Judicial Administ. 50

51 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR COURT MANAGEMENT CORE COMPETENCIES Information Technology Management Caseflow Management Leadership Education, Training, and Development Purposes And Responsibilities Of Courts Visioning and Strategic Planning Human Resources Management Essential Components Resources, Budget, and Finance Court Community Communication 51

52 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR COURT MANAGEMENT CORE COMPETENCIES Information Technology Management Caseflow Management Leadership Education, Training, and Development Purposes And Responsibilities Of Courts Visioning and Strategic Planning Human Resources Management Essential Components Resources, Budget, and Finance Court Community Communication 52

53 NEW CORE COMPETENCIES 53

54 TRIAL COURT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Access to Justice 2. Expedition and Timelines 3. Equality, Fairness and Integrity 4. Independence and Equality 5. Public Trust and Confidence 54

55 TRIAL COURT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Access to Justice 2. Expedition and Timelines 3. Equality, Fairness and Integrity 4. Independence and Equality 5. Public Trust and Confidence 55

56 COURTOOLS PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Access and Fairness 2. Clearance Rates 3. Time to Disposition 4. Age of Active Pending Caseload 5. Trial Date Certainty 6. Reliability and Integrity of Case Files 7. Collection of Monetary Penalties 8. Effective Use of Jurors 9. Court Employee Satisfaction 10. Cost per Case National Center for State Courts

57 COURTOOLS PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Access and Fairness 2. Clearance Rates 3. Time to Disposition 4. Age of Active Pending Caseload 5. Trial Date Certainty 6. Reliability and Integrity of Case Files 7. Collection of Monetary Penalties 8. Effective Use of Jurors 9. Court Employee Satisfaction 10. Cost per Case. National Center for State Courts

58 National Center for State Courts

59 CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT SYSTEM A system is anything that takes its integrity and form from the ongoing transaction of its parts. Systems are defined by the fact that their elements have a common purpose and behave in common ways, precisely because they are interrelated toward that purpose. (Senge, The Dance of Change, 137) Stephen V. Bouch 59

60 CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT SYSTEM What are the elements of a successful caseflow management system? Stephen V. Bouch 60

61 RESEARCH FINDINGS OF KEY ELEMENTS OF CFM SYSTEM Judicial Leadership & Commitment Caseflow Management Procedures Information & Consultation Staff Involvement Education & Training Mechanisms for Accountability Stephen V. Bouch 61

62 GROUP EXERCISE In these difficult economic times, how can a court best develop an effective case management system using existing resources? Define the roles of the presiding judge, court managers and staff in creating an effective case management system. For court which may not have ready access to case data, what steps can be taken to proceed with a case management plan? 62

63 SUGGESTED READING REGARDING RESOURCE CONSTRAINTS AND CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT: We Don t Have Enough Resources to Reduce Court Delay! CFM as a Tool to Provide Quality Justice that is Affordable as Well as Prompt. David Steelman

64 MONDAY, JULY 14 TH, 2014: 3:45 PM 4:45 PM Leadership and Commitment Caseflow Management Procedures Exercise/Activity 64

65 EXTERNAL RE-ENGINEERING: COURTS, JUSTICE AGENCIES AND STAKEHOLDERS Restorative Justice Model 65

66 LEADERSHIP TEAM How does the judge/manager team exhibit leadership in caseflow management? Stephen V. Bouch 66

67 LEADERSHIP AND COMMITMENT Enlists Other agencies Other judges Funding authority Attorneys Other stakeholders Commits His/her time Judge time Resources Staff Power of the office Stephen V. Bouch 67

68 Results of Court and Justice Agency Re-Engineering 400 million annual transactions Efforts Integrated Criminal Justice Information System: Criminals Victims Visitors City Police County Jails County Attorney Parole NLETS FBI AFIS MVD Private Counsel State Supreme Court Border Patrol Attorney General State Mental Hospital DHS Probation Corrections Department of Public Safety Indigent Representation Other States Criminal Justice IS Superior Court Justice Court Juvenile Court Initial Appearance Court Clerk of the Courts 68

69 LEADERSHIP AND COMMITMENT Ensure that other elements necessary for success are components of the CFM planning and implementation process Stephen V. Bouch 69

70 CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT AND PROCEDURES Encourage counsel and litigants to prepare Meets the needs of varying case types and complexity (DCM) Imbedded performance goals Volume, throughput, inventory Performance measured against goals Continuances monitored for diagnostics 70

71 COURTOOLS MEASURE 2 CLEARANCE RATES Superior court of Arizona in Maricopa County 71

72 COURTOOLS MEASURE 3 TIME TO DISPOSITION Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa, County 72

73 COURTOOLS MEASURE 4 AGE OF PENDING CASES Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County 73

74 SYSTEM AGREEMENT ON: Essential events for case processing Purposes of the events Timing between events Possible event outcomes Expectations of system performance Stephen V. Bouch 74

75 INFORMATION Caseload Trends Calendar Performance Caseflow Performance Standards Model Time Standards ABA and COSCA State Federal Stephen V. Bouch 75

76 ARIZONA SUPREME COURT 76

77 OHIO SUPREME COURT 77

78 CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT 78

79 National Center for State Courts

80 HISTORY OF NATIONAL TIME STANDARDS ABA Criminal 1968 ABA Other Cases 1976 COSCA 1983 ABA Amended 1984 ABA Amended 1992 Common Standards Adoption

81 NATIONAL MODEL TIME STANDARDS Approved August 2011 by the: Conference of State Court Administrators Conference of Chief Justices American Bar Association The National Association for Court Management National Center for State Courts

82 WA VT ME CA OR NV ID UT AZ AZ MT WY CO NM ND MN SD WI NE IA IL KS MO OK AR MS MI OH IN KY TN AL NY PA WV VA NC SC GA N H MA RIR CT I NJ DE MD DC TX LA AK FL HI No Case Processing Standards Case Processing Standards Adopted Standards Developed or Revised After 2011 Graphic created by Arizona Administrative Office of the Courts based upon National Center for State Courts (NCSC) data as of

83 TABLE OF MODEL TIME STANDARDS Van Duizend, R., Steelman, D., Suskin, L

84 TABLE OF MODEL TIME STANDARDS (CONTINUED) Van Duizend, R., Steelman, D., Suskin, L

85 MODEL TIME STANDARDS Criminal Felony 75% within 90 days 90% within 180 days 98% within 365 days Civil 75% within 180 day 90% within 365 days 98% within 540 day Family dissolution 75% within 120 days Van Duizend, R., Steelman, D., Suskin, L

86 TUESDAY, JULY 15TH, 2014: 10:45 AM 12:00 PM Information Consultation Staff Involvement Education and Training Exercise/Activity 86

87 ROLE OF INFORMATION As organizations become more mature within their analytics applications, the ability to manage that data across the business to provide a consistent and accurate view of what s happening becomes essential to continued success. Lyndsay Wyse The Importance of Data Management for Business 87

88 INFORMATION Timely Accurate Clearly Presented Used for Continuous Improvement Provides accountability A leadership best practice 88

89 REVERSE TELESCOPE (case disposition points) 80% Answered 60% At Issue CIVIL 45% to ADR 35% Settlement Conference 15% Pretrial 5% Trial Starts Cases Filed 100% 15% Pleas On Trial Setting(s) 50% Begin Trial 60% Pretrial Conference/Motions Hearing 80% First Appearance/Preliminary Hearing 97% Arraignment CRIMINAL 10% Trial Starts 2% Trial 5% Trial 82

90 CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT DATA AND INFORMATION Level 1 Basic Data & Information Level 2 For Efficient Information Level 3 For Top Management Efficiency 90

91 LEVEL 1 Basic caseflow and docket management How many cases are filed each year? How many cases are pending? How many cases are pending on each judge team or each judge s docket? How old are the pending cases? 91

92 LEVEL 1 What is the status of each case? What was the last event? When? What is the next event? When? Number disposed each year? How many cases by judge? By year, month, week, and day? How do the cases reach disposition? - jury, bench trial, settlement/plea, dismissal, etc.? How old are the cases when disposed? 92

93 LEVEL 2 Data about practices, volumes, timing How old are all pending cases How old are cases at disposition? When do dispositions occur? day of trial? before trial date is set? How many events are set? held? How many adjourned/continued/set over? How many dismissed? 93

94 LEVEL 2 What is the continuance rate for non trial events? What is the trial rate? How many set for trial & never result in a trial? How many appearances per case? How many appearances per case, if continuances were eliminated? 94

95 LEVEL 3 Trends, patterns, efficiency, system view How do charts of case flow (data) compare with perceptions of the system? What are the trial probability rates by type of case? Is judge time being efficiently utilized? What are the short- and long-term trends? What problems can be anticipated? What steps to take now to avoid future problems? 95

96 LEVEL 3 (CONTINUED) What are system strengths, weaknesses? What can be done to improve the system? What is the source of caseflow problems? Which cases are getting old? Where are there clogs? Why? Who s responsible? 96

97 WAYS TO OBTAIN INFORMATION Aggregate statistics Specific workload measures Count of interactions with litigants/customers Time and motion studies Inventories, sampling Pilot testing Benchmarking with other courts Review of other court statistics/materials 97

98 USING FLAGS & REMINDERS 98

99 CONSIDER - CourtMD CourTools Goals, targets, time, performance standards High Performance Court Framework Other court performance measures/metrics What other ways can you obtain data? Which data is most useful to you? 99

100 SCENARIOS Review assigned scenario Identify which performance data would be useful in assessing caseflow management 100

101 BENEFITS OF DATA AND INFORMATION Knowledge of court resource use, or need Program measurement for outcomes Decisions on data not emotion Accountability, transparency Ability to tell the court s story Use for continuous improvement Overall management Leadership responsibility & best practice System-wide view 101

102 CONSULTATION WITH STAKEHOLDERS Who are your stakeholders? EXERCISE: In one minute name as many as you can think of! How can stakeholders participate? How can you consult, collaborate with justice partners? What stakeholder groups have you used? 102

103 STAFF INVOLVEMENT Why would it be important to involve staff in caseflow management? How would you get staff involved? 103

104 EDUCATION AND TRAINING Why would education and training be important? Who would need training? How to do? What role does the local culture play? 104

105 TUESDAY, JULY 15 TH, 2014: 1:15 PM 2:15 PM Mechanisms for Accountability Individual Case Supervision Early Control and Intervention Exercise/Activity 105

106 LEADERSHIP AND COMMITMENT The ability to translate ideas into reality and sustain them over time. Warren Bennis Stephen V. Bouch 106

107 WHAT LEADERS DO Establish the vision Network with strategic partners Enable others to act Stephen V. Bouch 107

108 INDIVIDUAL CASE MANAGEMENT Individual justice in individual cases Establishing a systemic approach to ensure: Timely resolution of cases Optimal use of judicial resources Clear expectations for litigants, attorneys and other stakeholders Equal protection 108

109 INDIVIDUAL CASE MANAGEMENT Early control of case Continuous control of case Meaningful and realistic pre-trial event schedule Credible trial dates Stephen V. Bouch 109

110 EARLY CONTROL OF THE CASE What is the earliest time which the court can exercise control over a case? Stephen V. Bouch 110

111 EARLY AND CONTINUOUS CONTROL At every stage of the proceeding Activity set expectation Manage the case progress Ensure a future event date Stephen V. Bouch 111

112 SAMPLE FALL OUT CHART (CRIMINAL CASELOAD) CASES FILED 100% 60% PRETRIAL CONFERENCE/MOTIONS HEARING 50% BEGIN TRIAL 4% DISPOSED THROUGH TRIAL 80% FIRST APPEARANCE/PRELIMINARY HEARING 97% ARRAIGNMENT Time (Median) Cooper C., Solomon, M. & Bakke, H

113 SAMPLE FALL OUT CHART (CIVIL CASELOAD) CASES FILED 100% 45% ADR 35% SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 15% PRETRIAL CONFERENCE 5% TRIAL STARTS 2% TRIAL ENDS 60% AT ISSUE 80% ANSWERED Time (Median) Cooper, C., Solomon, M & Bakke, H

114 EXCLUDED TIME What about elapsed time beyond the court s control? Arrest and bench warrants Bankruptcy Soldier and Sailor s Civil Relief Act Interlocutory Appeals Stephen V. Bouch 114

115 INTERMEDIATE TIME STANDARDS Time goals for completing critical milestones during the life of a case, prior to final case resolution. 115

116 Decree Entered DISSOLUTION CASES: TEMPORARY ORDERS 90% ISSUED WITHIN 60 DAYS. 98% WITHIN 120 DAYS. Temporary order entered Request for temporary order filed Defendants served Case Filed 60 days 120 days 116

117 EX PARTE ORDER OF PROTECTION CASES - Contested Hearing ARIZONA: 99% WITHIN 24 HOURS 90% within 10 days 98% within 30 days Request for Hearing Filed Defendant Served Protective Order Issued or Denied Petition Filed 24 Hours 117

118 CREDIBLE TRIAL DATES Intentional setting of all court events in light of CFM standards Expectations of one and done Understanding of what good cause looks like Firm no continuance panel Court commitment to settings that ensure cases are heard when scheduled Stephen V.. Bouch 118

119 THE CONTINUANCE CHALLENGE Few cases ready to go High calendar setting volumes Cases low on list moved to next date Continuances routinely granted Judge time unused Court preparation wasted High calendar setting volumes Attorneys unprepared Few cases ready to go Attorneys unprepared Judge time unused Continuances routinely granted 119

120 GROUP EXERCISE Outline the key elements of an effective court continuance policy Determine the criteria for granting and denying continuances Discuss the extent to which the court s continuance should be have special provisions for particular case types, e.g., criminal, civil, family, juvenile and traffic 120

121 TUESDAY, JULY 15TH, 2014: 2:30 PM 3:30 PM Continuous Control of Case Progress Meaningful and Realistic Pretrial Event Schedule Credible Trial Dates Exercise/Activity 121

122 CONTINUOUS CASE PROGRESS CONTROL Court based scheduling (not lawyer based) Continuance police in place Case monitoring/supervision Common/consistent judge practices Guidelines for discovery/disclosure Administrative involvement 122

123 MEANINGFUL & REALISTIC PRETRIAL EVENTS Expected event sequence Specific purpose for each event Expected event outcome Emphasis on non-trial case disposition 123

124 CREDIBLE TRIAL DATES Backlog reduction Have information & data about trials Know historical trial use/rates/patterns Collaborate with bar association/members Know optimal/maximum set/overset amount Case status check immediately prior to trial Set as few as possible Trial date set late in case progress Have overflow trial capacity Have real-time overflow mechanism Real-time monitoring 124

125 EXERCISE Prepare listing of ways to have Continuous control of case progress Meaningful & realistic pre trial events Credible trial settings Prioritize Report to group 125

126 TUESDAY, JULY 15 TH, 2014: 3:45 PM 4:45 PM Assignment Systems and Calendar Structure Pros and Cons of Direct Case Assignment System Pros and Cons of Master Calendar Assignment System Critical Questions in Selecting a Calendar System Exercise/Activity 126

127 ASSIGNMENT SYSTEMS caseflow excellence can be achieved under both master and individual assignment systems as well as under the variety of hybrids found in courts across the country. Maureen Solomon and Douglas K. Somerlot, Caseflow Management in the Trial Court, ABA, Research from Justice Delayed: The Pace of Litigation in Urban Trial Courts, NCSC,

128 INDIVIDUAL CALENDAR SYSTEM Judge A Motions Conferences Disposition Cases Filed Judge B Motions Conferences Disposition Judge C Motions Conferences Disposition Judge D Motions Conferences Disposition Judge E Motions Conferences Disposition Graphic based upon Solomon M. & Somerlot, D

129 TEAM CALENDAR SYSTEM Motions/Conference Judge Judge A Trial Cases Filed Judge B Trial Judge B Trial Motions/Conference Judge Judge B Trial Graphic based upon Solomon M. & Somerlot, D

130 MASTER CALENDAR SYSTEM Judge A Disposition Judge B Disposition Cases Filed Motions Judge Conference Judge Central Trial List Trial Date Judge C Disposition Judge D Disposition Graphic based upon Solomon, M. & Somerlot, D

131 EVENTS IPTC CRIMINAL COURT MASTER CALENDAR Master Calendar Commissioner Comprehensive Pretrial Conference Master Calendar Commissioner (Unless directed otherwise by the Case Management Judge) Status Conference (If requested) Master Calendar Commissioner Or Case Management Judge (if the CPTC was handled by the Case Management Judge) Final Trial Management Conference Trial Assignment Case Management Judge Assignment Judge Trial Trial Judge (Preference to CMJ if available) Trial Judge (Preference to CMJ if available) Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County 131

132 INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT SYSTEM Pros Fixed responsibility Familiarity with case Consistency in case rulings Elimination of judge shopping with random assignments Competition Cons Need for interdivision communications Diminished administrative control Judge down time Duplication in scheduling efforts 132

133 MASTER ASSIGNMENT SYSTEM Pros Pooling of resources Certainty of trial Greater consistency in motion rulings Central scheduling Specialization Reduced attorney conflicts Cons No case ownership Lack of accountability Judge shopping with revised motions Lack of case familiarity Longer trial preparation time 133

134 DIFFERENTIATED CASE MANAGEMENT (DCM) a technique courts can use to tailor the case management process - the allocation of judicial resources to the needs of individual cases. Cooper, C, Solomon, M., & Bakke, H

135 Goals DIFFERENTIATED CASE MANAGEMENT Timely and just case disposition Improved use of resources Objectives Creation of multiple tracks, with differing disposition times Simple Standard Complex Early court screening of cases, using criteria for track placement Continuous court monitoring Procedures for changing track assignment Cooper, C, Solomon, M., & Bakke, H

136 CRITERIA FOR DCM TRACK PLACEMENT Middlesex County, New Jersey BJA,

137 SAMPLE DCM SCREENING FORMS BJA,

138 SAMPLE DCM SCREENING FORMS BJA,

139 CRITERIA FOR DCM TRACK PLACEMENT BJA,

140 GROUP EXERCISE Testing Your Knowledge of Case flow Management and Performance Data: Five Court Scenarios 140

141 COURT A Filings Disposition January February March April May June 141

142 COURT A 140% Clearance Rate 120% 100% Clearance Rate 80% 60% Clearance Rate 40% 20% 0% January February March April May June 142

143 COURT A 450 Active Pending Cases 400 Number of Cases Pending Cases January February March April May June 143

144 COURT A Active Inactive January February March April May June 144

145 COURT B Medical Mal Contract Dissolution Foreclosure January February March April May June 145

146 COURT B January Filings Foreclosure Dissolution Contract Medical Mal 146

147 COURT B June Filings Foreclosure Dissolution Contract Medical Mal 147

148 COURT B Days to Disposition Foreclosure Time to Disposition 50 0 January February March April May June Axis Title 148

149 COURT B Days to Disposition Foreclosure Time to Disposition 90 Day Time Standard 50 0 January February March April May June Axis Title 149

150 COURT C 350 Dissolution Time to Disposition 300 Days to Disposition Dissolution Time to Disposition 50 0 January February March April May June 150

151 COURT C With Children Without Children 50 0 January February March April May June 151

152 COURT D 250 Time to Disposition 200 Days to Disposition January February March April May June Judge A Judge B Judge C Judge D Judge E 152

153 JUDGE E CASES DISPOSED IN MAY Case 1: Case 2: Case 3: Case 4: Case 5: 500 Days 120 Days 120 Days 130 Days 100 Days 153

154 COURT E Active Pending Caseload Felony Misdemeanor Number of Cases January February March April May June 154

155 COURT E Active Pending Caseload Felony Misdemeanor Number of Cases Drug Court Started January February March April May June 155

156 COURT E 250 Case Assignment 200 Number of Cases General Court Calendar Drug Court 0 January February March April May June 156

157 WRAP UP Final comments & thoughts Review key learning points 157

158 CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT RATE YOUR COURT T F Question T F 1. Our court leadership (presiding judge/judges, administrator) takes a leadership role in caseflow management. T F 2. Our court has a (published) mission and vision statement. My Priority To Implement 1 (hi) to 5 (lo) T F 3. Our court has a caseflow management policy, plan or process. T F 4. We have and use case processing standards and goals. T F 5. Our court measures case age from filing to disposition. T F 6. My court uses early case review. T F 7. The judges limit the number of continuances. T F 8. My court publishes and uses data and case processing performance measures. T F 9. Our court meets regularly with justice system stakeholders/partners. 158

159 RELATIONSHIP AMONG ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF SUCCESSFUL CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS Apply Proven Techniques Exercise Active Management: Set Goals; Monitor Performance; and Enforce Accountability Establish and Maintain a Secure Foundation for Managing the Pace of Litigation: Exercise Leadership; Stay Committed to a Shared Vision of Timely and Cost-Effective Justice; Communicate, Communicate, Communicate; and Promote a Learning Environment Steelman, D. C

160 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Arizona Supreme Court Bureau of Justice Assistance, Differentiated Case Management California Supreme Court Government and International Studies, University of South Carolina Hans Zeisel et al, Delay in the Court, Harvard Law Review Michigan State University National Center for State Courts (NCSC) NACM Core Competencies Ohio Supreme Court Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County The Arizona Republic Holly Bakke Stephen V. Bouch Caroline Cooper, The American University Ernie Friesen Alec Ross Maureen Solomon Doug Somerlot David C. Steelman, NCSC Lee Suskin, NCSC Robert W. Tobin, NCSC Richard Van Duizend, NCSC The Defender The Wall Street Journal Trial Court Performance Standards Wikipedia 160

161 REFERENCES Caseflow Management in the Trial Court: Now and For the Future Maureen Solomon & Douglas K. Somerlot (American Bar Association, 2000) Chief Justice Blasts Backlog The Arizona Republic, Mike McCloy, February 26, 1999 CourTools: Giving Courts the Tools to Measure Success 2-4 (National Center for State Courts, 2005) Courts That Succeed: Six Profiles of Successful Courts, William E. Hewitt, Geoff Gallas, Barry Mahoney (National Center for State Courts, 1990) Creating the Judicial Branch: The Unfinished Reform, Robert W. Tobin, (National Center for State Courts, 2004) Delay in the Court, Hans Zeisel, Harry Kalven Jr., Bernard Buchholz,

162 REFERENCES Court Performance Measures: What You Count, Counts!, Janet G. Cornell (NACM Court Manager, Vol. 29, Issue 1, Winter 2014) Differentiated Case Management 53. Caroline Cooper, Maureen Solomon & Holly Bakke (Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice, 1993) Improving Caseflow Management: A Brief Guide. David C. Steelman (National Center for State Courts 2008) Improving Criminal Caseflow, Maureen Solomon (Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice and American University, 2008) Justice Delayed: The Pace of Litigation in Urban Trial Courts, NCSC,

163 REFERENCES Model Time Standards for State Trial Courts (National Center for State Courts, 2011) Model Time Standards for State Trial Courts 3, Richard Van Duizend, David C. Steelman & Lee Suskin (National Center for State Courts 2011) Satisfying the Appearance of Justice. The Uses of Apparent Impropriety in Constitutional Adjudication Harvard Law Review Vol. 117, No 9 (June. 2004). Pp Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County, Administrative Order No The Need for Docket Speed How Far will it Go? The Defender, Arizona Attorneys for Criminal Justice January, 1999 Trial Court Performance Standards for State Trial Courts (National Center for State Courts, 2011) 163