Court Case Management Systems Part 20: User Interface (UI) and More

https://goo.gl/UGJioL

In this long-delayed edition in the Court Case Management Systems (CCMS) series, we will discuss some thoughts on user interfaces (UI) for court systems.  It is an exciting time to explore this area because the technology is developing quickly, and there are many new possibilities for developers to consider.  And because of all the new developments, this article has been delayed many times.

But it is summer time and so it is time to dive in...

Note: Previous work by our colleagues at the NCSC and other experts provides the list of functionality (the what). This CCMS series has been our attempt to describe “how” technologies have been and could be used in the courts.  

Click here for the previous posts in this series.

More This and That in Court Tech – March 2018

https://goo.gl/yg8YSH

This edition contains a Judge’s response on court automation project criticism, Google Plus Addresses, a lawsuit between judges and clerk regarding their electronic document system implementation, editing PDF documents, the Indiana court’s E-filing implementation web page, and the new NCSC home page is announced.

Court Document Verification in Brazil

The Supreme Court of Brazil

Last week I had the great honor of speaking with a very distinguished group of judges and lawyers from Brazil here at the NCSC. 

While I was preparing for the visit I found an order from one of the Federal Judges.  While reviewing it I found several very interesting ways that they are dealing with the electronic document verification in their courts.

This and That in Court Technology – Early March, 2018

Lady Justice - Supreme Court of Nigeria

This month’s edition we share posts regarding the Court Messaging Project, elimination of paper submissions at the Supreme Court of Nigeria, another good online traffic case dispute resolution story, Code for America CourtBot, Massachusetts Trial Courts eliminating court reporters, and links to the Global Legal Hackathon.

Courts Implement New Online Search Systems

We learned this week about two new search systems being implemented by the state courts in Arkansas and Illinois.  More below…

A New NCSC Report on Automated Redaction

https://www.shareicon.net/ 

In a follow-up to the July paper on “Best Practices for Court Privacy Policy Formulation”, the NCSC with the support of The State Justice Institute, the new paper, "Automated Redaction Proof of Concept Report" addresses the need for policies and technology for redaction of protected information. 


More below…

Preserving the Record

The article last week regarding Judge Michael Marcus and his website, smartsentencing.com got me thinking about one of the court’s most important duties, preserving the record.  I share my list of strategies and options below.

Structuring Documents – Why and How

The challenge we have as courts is to turn documents into actionable information.  We most commonly do this by re-entering data into the case management systems database.  The courts can and should do better by using the software that most everyone already owns.  We discuss below.

Some More Thoughts on CMS Data Conversion

Recently there has been news about case management systems projects with data conversion error problems.  While we have written about this issue before, I would like to share some more thoughts on this important issue.

This and That in Court Technology – March, 2017

Time for another round-up of court technology related items.  In this edition we remind everyone of the CTC 2017 proposal deadline, the Wyoming courts need to increase their Court Automation Fee, an online paperless court savings calculator, an argument for AI technology to replace juries in the future, and a story about "Amy Ingram", a digital scheduling assistant "bot" program.

This and That in Court Technology – January, 2017

Just like the National Football League (USA style pictured here), there is a lot of news regarding digital transformation.  The edition has notes on an American Bar Association report on E-Briefing, Nebraska appellate court E-filing, a Robot Lawyer application for parking tickets, a RAND corporation report on “Future Proofing” justice, commentary on potentially opening California legal publication, and a couple of technologies that need to be sent to the trash bin.

This and That in Court Technology – December, 2016

In this month's edition, we have e-Courts information; some news items and announcements from Microsoft; Alameda County, California CMS problems; a new way to annotate legal briefs; and some holiday gift guides for last minute shopping.

---

Law Firms as an Electronic Filing Service Provider

We are pleased to share the following article by Mr. Dallas Powell, President of Tybera, Inc., an E-filing services company.  In the article he shares their experience with law firms and government agencies connecting directly to the court's EFM (E-Filing Manager) services.

US Federal Courts PACER Fees Litigation

US Federal Courthouse Las Cruces NM

An article posted at qz.com (Quartz) discusses the court case regarding fees for the public use of the US Federal Courts PACER system.  The article notes:

“the paywall that surrounds Pacer is facing what may be its most serious test since the service emerged 28 years ago. Judge Ellen Huvelle of the US district court in Washington DC is expected to decide in the coming days whether a lawsuit accusing the government of setting Pacer fees at unlawfully high rates can proceed. 

The case, which is seeking class-action certification, is being led by three nonprofits: the National Veterans Legal Service Program, the National Consumer Law Center, and the Alliance for Justice. Each group says it has downloaded documents from Pacer and incurred charges alleged to exceed the cost of providing the records. All say the setup violates the E-Government Act of 2002, which authorizes the judiciary to “prescribe reasonable fees”—and which the plaintiffs argue should limit the government to charge users “only to the extent necessary” to make the information available.”

The full article is worth reading because it provides some explanation of fee waivers and, the total amount of revenue generated that supports court automation that is not provided by Congress in budget appropriation.  We would also point out that there are additional issues such as costs relating to data privacy, redaction, and management that are not addressed in the article.

This and That in Court Technology – September, 2016

Attendees enjoying e-Courts

We share news about the e-Courts 2016 Conference, the Federal Courts test of prisoner electronic access kiosks, news in the search for a quiet keyboard - now in portable form, questions raised about Australian use of court videoconferencing, a Blockchain notarization service, and a new court podcast in Florida.

CSI Announces Intellidact LBX™ Machine Learning Technology

I am happy to share a press release from one of our leading court technology vendors this week.  CSI has been working with courts for more than 20 years in support and the development of automated redaction technology.  Their new system provides a powerful way for courts to bridge the gap between paper and electronic data.  Congratulations to our good friends in Orlando for this significant achievement.

The full press release follows below:

More Developments in Blockchain Technology and the Law

Blockchain technology or as it is also known as, “distributed ledger”, is the subject of a great deal of thinking and development this year.  We wrote about it earlier in the year and now we share some recent work being done at MIT Media Lab’s lawchain.org project.

Connecting the E-Filing “Pipes”

Craig VanBrussel, CTO for the First Judicial Circuit of Florida wrote after listening to the recent online Court Tech Futures webinar about how they are closing the loop with their E-filing pipes.

A Response to Texas Criminal E-Filing Mandate Concerns

I received a link to an article in Texas Lawyer from our friend, new PhD Bill Raftery at Gavel to Gavel regarding a public hearing held on April 5, 2016 at the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals regarding mandatory criminal case E-filing.  The article notes that the court has already made filing mandatory for their cases.  But they heard additional concerns that I will comment on:

The Digital Paper E-Ink Device from Sony Surprises

Technology surprises appear every day… even when they are over two years old.  Last week I stumbled across the Sony Digital Paper device at the American Bar Association TechShow in Chicago.  In many ways this is the device in my opinion that many judges have been looking for.