Now that everyone uses either word processing software or has the case management system create standard documents electronically, why are most courts only storing the data on paper in the paper file? In my experience there is continually an issue in court case management systems as to new data fields that must be added to either track new things for statistical information or to clarify information such as judgments, sentencing, or orders. So since electronic storage is so very cheap today, why aren't all court electronic generated documents being automatically saved in the court's system?
Is there an issue as to whether the electronic copy is the original or true copy? If so, then the documents should be printed to PDF.
Is there an issue that either a conforming or judge's signature is not affixed to the document? Then a digital signature and file stamp (or watermark) can be used.
Is there an issue regarding control? If so then digital rights management and encryption should be examined as a possible solution.
The point of this is that I believe a case management system should be focused on what its name says, managing cases. Documents can then be appropriately used, searched, and hopefully tagged to supplement the case management process and in the near future be applied for judicial research and use.
Next time, I'll write about self-docketing documents.
Saturday, August 9, 2008
Friday, August 8, 2008
Testing Virtual Machines
Recently I received a new laptop computer. The new laptop is very nice with a wide-format screen, 2 gigabytes of RAM, and a big 160 gigabyte hard drive. And since my old laptop was still doing fine I decided it was time to experiment with Virtual Machine (VM) software. For those who might not have kept up on VM technology, simply said it is software that lets one emulate various computer operating systems such as Microsoft Vista or XP, Linux, UNIX, or even MS-DOS on a host computer. In other words, one creates a “virtual” computer using software within a host system. For a much more complete explanation of VM software see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_machine
I’ve been testing Sun’s virtual machine software called VirtualBox. But of course there are many other options to explore such as industry leader VMware as well as Microsoft’s Virtual PC 2007 software. Apple Mac users have Parallels Desktop and VMware Fusion to choose from. An excellent list of different VM software is posted on Wikipedia at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_virtual_machines
I have posted a picture here to show you that I was able to load MSDOS, OpenSUSE Linux, and Vista on top of the installed Windows XP on my laptop. Now to be realistic, I would need more RAM (chip) memory in my machine if I were to run all of these are the same time. But it does seem to do the job quite nicely, and has the advantage of being free to use. I thought you might enjoy the picture.
Now why are VM’s useful? I can think of three reasons off the top of my head. First, the obvious one is if there is a particular piece of software that only available on a particular operating system (OS), one can install that OS (legally licensed of course just like my Vista software) and then install the application.
Second, the ability to run older software programs to retrieve data could be particularly useful. One might notice in the picture, my old CMS from the 80’s in Arizona is running in the MS-DOS window. Therefore, if I had a court’s data from that system, I could run search and run reports without needing to convert the data. It is interesting to note that there is as project is building VMs for older minicomputer systems of the past: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIMH
A third reason is to be able to test software on different applications in “clean” OS environments. One can also emulate client / server networks or browser / server networks within a single machine. Many VM’s have the ability to create “snapshots” of a system that allows a baseline configuration from which new software or configurations can be tested. And if the approach doesn’t work; no problem, delete it and try again. In the near future I am going to build a Linux client working with a Microsoft server to learn the best way to configure such a system.
Using VM? Let us know and we’ll post your story.
I’ve been testing Sun’s virtual machine software called VirtualBox. But of course there are many other options to explore such as industry leader VMware as well as Microsoft’s Virtual PC 2007 software. Apple Mac users have Parallels Desktop and VMware Fusion to choose from. An excellent list of different VM software is posted on Wikipedia at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_virtual_machines
I have posted a picture here to show you that I was able to load MSDOS, OpenSUSE Linux, and Vista on top of the installed Windows XP on my laptop. Now to be realistic, I would need more RAM (chip) memory in my machine if I were to run all of these are the same time. But it does seem to do the job quite nicely, and has the advantage of being free to use. I thought you might enjoy the picture.
Now why are VM’s useful? I can think of three reasons off the top of my head. First, the obvious one is if there is a particular piece of software that only available on a particular operating system (OS), one can install that OS (legally licensed of course just like my Vista software) and then install the application.
Second, the ability to run older software programs to retrieve data could be particularly useful. One might notice in the picture, my old CMS from the 80’s in Arizona is running in the MS-DOS window. Therefore, if I had a court’s data from that system, I could run search and run reports without needing to convert the data. It is interesting to note that there is as project is building VMs for older minicomputer systems of the past: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIMH
A third reason is to be able to test software on different applications in “clean” OS environments. One can also emulate client / server networks or browser / server networks within a single machine. Many VM’s have the ability to create “snapshots” of a system that allows a baseline configuration from which new software or configurations can be tested. And if the approach doesn’t work; no problem, delete it and try again. In the near future I am going to build a Linux client working with a Microsoft server to learn the best way to configure such a system.
Using VM? Let us know and we’ll post your story.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Court Technology Bulletin Archive Online
Last week we received welcome news that our NCSC Knowledge and Information Services team had imaged all of the printed issues of the Court Technology Bulletin in PDF files. The Bulletin was issued in printed format from 1989 to 2003. It is interesting to see how technology has changed and improved over that time span. You can also see how good or bad I was at making technology trend predictions in my articles about the huge COMDEX computer expositions . The index to the CTB issues is located at: http://www.ncsconline.org/d_tech/archive/Bulletin/bulletinarchive.htm
Thursday, July 17, 2008
US Federal Court Test Online Digital Audio Recordings
The June, 2008 edition of The Third Branch newsletter from the US Federal Courts contains an article titled: Pilot Project Update: Digital Audio Recordings Online. The article explains: quotIn a pilot project that began last August, five federal courts are docketing some digital audio recordings to Case Management/Electronic Case Files CM/ECF systems to make the audio files available in the same way written files have long been available on the Internet. The three other courtsnbsp are the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Maine, and the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Alabama.quot The article also notes: quotA major concern is assuring that personal information including Social Security and financial account numbers, dates of birth, and names of minor childrennot be available on any online digital audio recording. The Judiciary39s privacy policy restricts publication of such information. Each of the pilot courts warns lawyers and litigants in a variety of ways that they can, and should, request that recorded proceedings that include information covered by the privacy policy, or other sensitive matters, not be posted.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
US Virgin Islands Court Issues RFP
The Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands has issued a Request for Proposal RFP that seeks an Appellate Case Management solution that incorporates Efiling and Document Management capabilities. The RFP is posted at the following web page: http://www.visupremecourt.org/Administrative_Services/RFPs
The Intent to Bid letter is due at 4:00 p.m., Atlantic Standard Time on July 24, 2008 and Proposals are due by 4:00 p.m. Atlantic Standard Time on August 18, 2008.
The Intent to Bid letter is due at 4:00 p.m., Atlantic Standard Time on July 24, 2008 and Proposals are due by 4:00 p.m. Atlantic Standard Time on August 18, 2008.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Texas Judicial Commission Adopts Functional Model
In a press release: On June 27, 2008, The Supreme Court of Texas Judicial Commission for Children, Youth and Families formally adopted a functional requirements reference model to address the special case management needs of courts handling child protection dependency cases. The reference model consists of a number of web pages presented in an interactive format, providing overviews of the court process, timelines, a feature to allow deep drilldown into the particulars of each subprocess, and detailed descriptions of the data requirements.
Culminating nearly two years of work, the functional requirements reference model was developed to provide developers of court case management software an authoritative set of requirements for the creation of specialized modules of court software systems. The Office of Court Administration, headed by Carl Reynolds, undertook the project in 2005 after receiving Court Improvement Program grant funding, which was given to the Supreme Court of Texas by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families.
In Texas and most other states, child protection cases must follow tightly controlled timelines. The cases may have multiple participants, with the judge acting in a problemsolving role. The reference model may be the most comprehensive description ever created to address the special needs of courts handling child abuse and neglect cases. Judges, clerks, attorneys, and other stakeholders from around Texas worked closely with technologists to identify almost all aspects of child protection case management. This is not a system, but a set of blueprints that will enable any software developer to understand the unique court process utilized in this type of case to write the software, said Reynolds.
The Supreme Court Permanent Judicial Commission for Children, Youth and Families is chaired by Justice Harriet OrsquoNeill of the Supreme Court of Texas. Judge Darlene Byrne of Travis County chaired the Technology Committee, which oversaw the development of the functional requirements reference model. It is available on the Commission website, at: http://www.courts.state.tx.us/oca/texdeck/frd/TexDECK%20Functional%20Requirements.htm .
Culminating nearly two years of work, the functional requirements reference model was developed to provide developers of court case management software an authoritative set of requirements for the creation of specialized modules of court software systems. The Office of Court Administration, headed by Carl Reynolds, undertook the project in 2005 after receiving Court Improvement Program grant funding, which was given to the Supreme Court of Texas by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families.
In Texas and most other states, child protection cases must follow tightly controlled timelines. The cases may have multiple participants, with the judge acting in a problemsolving role. The reference model may be the most comprehensive description ever created to address the special needs of courts handling child abuse and neglect cases. Judges, clerks, attorneys, and other stakeholders from around Texas worked closely with technologists to identify almost all aspects of child protection case management. This is not a system, but a set of blueprints that will enable any software developer to understand the unique court process utilized in this type of case to write the software, said Reynolds.
The Supreme Court Permanent Judicial Commission for Children, Youth and Families is chaired by Justice Harriet OrsquoNeill of the Supreme Court of Texas. Judge Darlene Byrne of Travis County chaired the Technology Committee, which oversaw the development of the functional requirements reference model. It is available on the Commission website, at: http://www.courts.state.tx.us/oca/texdeck/frd/TexDECK%20Functional%20Requirements.htm .
Monday, July 7, 2008
Court Tech Bulletin Hit with SQL Injection Attack and Other Items
On approximately June 21, 2008, the Court Technology Bulletin website was taken down with an SQL virus code injection attack. We apologize for all for any inconvenience that this caused. This site has been repaired and further security measures instituted. As a result, we also lost all of the articles that we posted for the month of June 1. A summary of some of these articles are posted below.
Illinois Courts Announce E-Business Initiative 6/10/08
In a press release, Chief Justice Robert R. Thomas of the Illinois Supreme Court announced on May 23, 2008 a wide ranging plan to build a technological infrastructure that would link electronically all the courts in the state's 23 judicial circuits and 102 counties.quot For more information, an E-Business in the Illinois Judiciary website has been posted at: http://www.state.il.us/court/ebusiness/default.asp
Vermont Courts Announce Case Management System RFP 6/13/08
The State of Vermont Judiciary announced the posting of a Request for Proposal RFP for a new, consolidated, statewide courts case management, document management, and Efiling solution VCase. The RFP and Attachment files are posted on the Vermont BusinessToBusiness website at: http://www.vermontbusinessregistry.com/BidPreview.aspx?BidID=5627
Nebraska Starts Civil E-Filing 6/20/08
In a press release, quotthe Nebraska Administrative Office of the Courts AOC, in collaboration with http://www.Nebraska.gov, has launched a new online system for attorneys to file new civil cases and to make subsequent filings on open cases. Attorneys who subscribe to http://www.Nebraska.gov are eligible to use the Efiling system. There are no addditional fees to file a case online. The normal court fees for filing cases are transferred electronically from the attorney's account, to the court of filing. The Nebraska Lawyer Magazine's Bar Bytes column for May, 2008 by William E. Olson contains additional information on the new system.
Illinois Courts Announce E-Business Initiative 6/10/08
In a press release, Chief Justice Robert R. Thomas of the Illinois Supreme Court announced on May 23, 2008 a wide ranging plan to build a technological infrastructure that would link electronically all the courts in the state's 23 judicial circuits and 102 counties.quot For more information, an E-Business in the Illinois Judiciary website has been posted at: http://www.state.il.us/court/ebusiness/default.asp
Vermont Courts Announce Case Management System RFP 6/13/08
The State of Vermont Judiciary announced the posting of a Request for Proposal RFP for a new, consolidated, statewide courts case management, document management, and Efiling solution VCase. The RFP and Attachment files are posted on the Vermont BusinessToBusiness website at: http://www.vermontbusinessregistry.com/BidPreview.aspx?BidID=5627
Nebraska Starts Civil E-Filing 6/20/08
In a press release, quotthe Nebraska Administrative Office of the Courts AOC, in collaboration with http://www.Nebraska.gov, has launched a new online system for attorneys to file new civil cases and to make subsequent filings on open cases. Attorneys who subscribe to http://www.Nebraska.gov are eligible to use the Efiling system. There are no addditional fees to file a case online. The normal court fees for filing cases are transferred electronically from the attorney's account, to the court of filing. The Nebraska Lawyer Magazine's Bar Bytes column for May, 2008 by William E. Olson contains additional information on the new system.
Friday, May 30, 2008
Guam Issues RFP
The Judiciary of Guam has issued a Request for Proposal "To Furnish, Deliver and Install a National Crime Information Center (NCIC) Communications Message Processor System/Computerized Criminal History Records Application. Responses are due June 9, 2008. For questions or a copy of the RFP please contact:
Mr. Reymond L.G. Taimanglo
Procurement and Fac. Mgt. Administrator
Procurement and Fac. Mgt. Division
Guam Judicial Center
120 West O'Brien Drive
Hagatna, Guam 96910
Telephone (671)475-3175/3393
Fax: (671)477-8009
Email: rtaimanglo@mail.justice.gov.gu
Mr. Reymond L.G. Taimanglo
Procurement and Fac. Mgt. Administrator
Procurement and Fac. Mgt. Division
Guam Judicial Center
120 West O'Brien Drive
Hagatna, Guam 96910
Telephone (671)475-3175/3393
Fax: (671)477-8009
Email: rtaimanglo@mail.justice.gov.gu
Oregon Courts Receive Automation Funding
Judge Michael Marcus in Oregon passed along this information from the court's Chief Information Officer, Bud Borja:
"The Oregon Judicial Department’s efforts to obtaining funding for the Oregon eCourt program earlier this year was successful. Two bills passed in the February 2008, Supplement Session provided 24 million in debt financing for Oregon eCourt. In addition, Oregon Judicial Department (OJD) has authority to spend $2 million from the Collections Account funds that have been set aside for a financial system eplacement. Receiving this funding allows OJD to move forward with the replacement of our existing case and financial management systems and to bring modern business tools and practices into the Oregon courts."
Video of testimony before the legislature supporting the eCourts initivative has been posted on YouTube. Here are links to the video clips:
Judges explain eCourt Urgency: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoPjMQXQ3Lk
TCA explains eCourt Urgency: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Clbv5bq7R_Q
How eCourt improves sentencing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-a7Wnzmb7A
"The Oregon Judicial Department’s efforts to obtaining funding for the Oregon eCourt program earlier this year was successful. Two bills passed in the February 2008, Supplement Session provided 24 million in debt financing for Oregon eCourt. In addition, Oregon Judicial Department (OJD) has authority to spend $2 million from the Collections Account funds that have been set aside for a financial system eplacement. Receiving this funding allows OJD to move forward with the replacement of our existing case and financial management systems and to bring modern business tools and practices into the Oregon courts."
Video of testimony before the legislature supporting the eCourts initivative has been posted on YouTube. Here are links to the video clips:
Judges explain eCourt Urgency: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoPjMQXQ3Lk
TCA explains eCourt Urgency: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Clbv5bq7R_Q
How eCourt improves sentencing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-a7Wnzmb7A
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Juvenile Information Sharing Webinar On Tap
The Center for Network Development in conjunction with the Juvenile Information Sharing Project has announced that will present a webinar supported by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) on June 19, 2008 from 1:00-2:00 PM on the framework for analyzing state laws as recommended in the Guidelines for Juvenile Information Sharing.
The announcement listed the following learning objectives for the session:
The announcement listed the following learning objectives for the session:
- What state law permits and requires as to juvenile record sharing
- Statutory models that authorize multiple agency cooperation
- Interagency agreements and working memoranda of understanding
- About an important online resource
Monday, May 19, 2008
Federal Court Creates Mobile Website
The April, 2008 edition of The Third Branch newsletter from the US Federal Courts contains an article titled "District Court Offers Mobile Version of Its Website". The article begins:
"Like most federal courts, the Northern District of Illinois created its website long before the advent of e-filing and the proliferation of hand-held computers."
"Like most federal courts, the Northern District of Illinois created its website long before the advent of e-filing and the proliferation of hand-held computers."
Friday, May 16, 2008
Jonathan Zittrain Interview
CTC6 keynote speaker, Oxford/Harvard Professor Jonathan Zittrain was interviewed on the Charlie Rose show on May13, 2008. To view the video from the show click here.
E-Courts 2008 Online Registration Available
Online registration for this year's E-Courts Conference is now available. The conference will take place December 8-10 in Las Vegas, Nevada. Our theme is Getting the Job Done and our main focus will be on the real-life benefits that electronic documents, communications, and data systems offer your court. In addition to important sessions providing information on how to manage budgetary constraints while trying to maintain optimal productivity and quality of justice, the conference will again feature a manageable vendor exhibit with vendor showcase sessions. This is the one court technology event where you can actually take time to sit down and talk one-on-one with the technology vendors about your ideas and plans for improving your court.
Friday, May 9, 2008
New Services Task Team Created
The Global Infrastructure/Standards Working Group (GISWG) has initiated a Services Task Team (STT) for the Justice Reference Architecture (JRA)with the help of the Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Assistance (DOJ BJA). The task team is being managed as a joint project by IJIS, NCSC and SEARCH. Jim Douglas from SEARCH chairs the STT. Their first JRA service definitions will be for fusion center suspicious activity reports and fingerprint/biometric services. State and local justice projects using the JRA are underway in Maine, New York, Utah and Illinois. Nevada is also considering its use for a court data integration project. For more on GISWG go to their website at: http://www.iir.com/global/GISWG.htm
NIEM Technical Advisory Committee Update
NCSC VP for Research and Technology, Tom Clarke reports that the NIEM Technical Advisory Committee (NTAC) met recently and finished work on several important documents, while continuing work on other key policies. The committee has defined a comprehensive list of quality assurance measures for NIEM, defined a comprehensive set of tool requirements in support of NIEM, and agreed on a conceptual approach that enables NIEM domains to issue their own version updates between major NIEM releases.
The committee also completed work on the Naming and Design Rules (NDR) Version 1.3, which provides conformance guidance for the NIEM data model and IEPD's built using it. In the coming months, NTAC will work with the other NIEM governance committees to prioritize the implementation of quality assurance measures and tool interface definitions. Finally, NTAC recommends that no major NIEM release occur before at least early 2010.
The committee also completed work on the Naming and Design Rules (NDR) Version 1.3, which provides conformance guidance for the NIEM data model and IEPD's built using it. In the coming months, NTAC will work with the other NIEM governance committees to prioritize the implementation of quality assurance measures and tool interface definitions. Finally, NTAC recommends that no major NIEM release occur before at least early 2010.
Joint Technology Committee Approves E-Filing Standard Update
The Joint Technology Committee (JTC) of COSCA and NACM recently approved the use of the OASIS LegalXML Electronic Court Filing (ECF) Standard Version 3.1 after technical review by the Court Information Technology Officers' Consortium (CITOC). The LegalXML Technical Committee is on the verge of issuing Version 4.0, which adds several case types and brings the standard into full compliance with both NIEM 2.0 and the Justice Reference Architecture. We also understand that there are also several pilots of the e-filing technical standard underway in state and local court systems.
Friday, May 2, 2008
Trends Article on Tablet PCs
The NCSC's Trends articles has introduced an article on Tablet Personal Computers with pictures of the format options, and links to three articles posted by an attorney that uses them. In addition, one of the articles has an interesting note on a Tablet PC forms software application that could be useful in the courtroom.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
NAJIS Conference Scheduled
The National Association for Justice Information Systems (NAJIS) has scheduled their annual conference for September 23-26, 2008 at Bally's Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada. Their E-mail states: "Designed by practitioners for practitioners. This is a law and justice technology professional conference that delivers unprecedented objectivity, quality, and quantity of information exchanged through the NAJIS membership." Having been a member of NAJIS I can attest to the usefulness of this conference and to the helpfulness of the associations membership.
NIEM National Training Scheduled
The IJIS Institute has scheduled national XML and NIEM training in Ashburn, Virginia from May 5-9 and June 9-12. For more information contact Samantha Styles.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Access to Justice 2.0 is Announced
We received this announcement from the Chicago-Kent College of Law, Center for Access to Justice and Technology:
A2J AUTHOR 2.0 IS HERE!
What’s special about 2.0?
Several enhancements, many of which were suggested by A2J Author™ users, have been included in Version 2.0. While some of the improvements in 2.0 face the pro se users of the A2J Guided Interviews™, most of the improvements make the tool more efficient and easier for the authoring community to use.
New Features for the authors of A2J Guided Interviews™ include the ability to:
The most prominent new 2.0 feature aimed at the user is an alternative end graphic. This feature provides the developer the ability to exchange the traditional courthouse graphic for an alternative graphic designated by the author. With the increasing popularity of the program as a means to conduct online web intake, programs will now be able to designate a graphic more in tune with the purpose of the interview.
While we are very proud to get you version 2.0, we are already hard at work on version 3.0, which promises to eclipse any of the previous versions of the software. Version 3.0 will bring video and graphics into the A2J Author interface and will deliver the import question(s) function.
Want to learn more?
Attend the next A2J Author Developer Call! We will discuss in more detail the new features and functions of A2J Author 2.0 and components of the A2J Author 2.0 Starter-Kit.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008, 10:00 a.m. (CDT)
Register for the Developer Call here: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/549827495
Ready to upgrade to 2.0?
A2J Author™ 2.0 can be downloaded at the following location: http://www.a2jauthor.org
Is the “national server” (NPADO) upgraded with 2.0?
YES. The National Public Automated Documents Online server has been upgraded with A2J Viewer 2.0, the viewer through which all of your A2J Guided Interviews will be launched on the web. Version 2.0 of the “Viewer” should not have any adverse effect on A2J Guided Interviews created in either A2J Author 2.0 or any previous version of A2J Author.
Please be ALERT to the following:
While the A2J Viewer has been tested on the development server, we do not know exactly which of the thousands of interviews uploaded to the national server are in production. It is impossible for us to test all “live” interviews on the production server. Therefore, as introduction of new software always presents some risks, we recommend that you take some time this week, or as soon as possible, to test run those interviews which are in production. It would be worth everyone’s peace of mind, and very helpful to us, to at least check those interviews that receive a lot of traffic. Please notify our office immediately if you notice any inconsistencies, by phone (312-906-5328) or email (a2j-author@kentlaw.edu).
Interested in attending A2J Author 2.0 Training?
A number of training sessions have been scheduled for the next couple of weeks. Each training session will include a new user component and an advanced component. You are welcome to attend the entire session or the first or second half. Each session will be held at 12:00 – 2:00 p.m. (CST). The agenda for each session is as follows:
12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m. (CST)
The first hour: New User Introduction to A2J Author 2.0
*Navigating A2J Author
*Adding, Inserting & Cloning Questions
*Designing Questions in A2J Author
*Adding an Alternative Graphic
1:00 p.m. – 1:05 p.m. (CST)
5-minute break
1:05 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (CST)
The second hour: “Stay after class” to learn advanced features
*Writing Conditions in 2.0
*Working with the “A2J Step” Program Variable
*Using Macros to Set Multiple Choice Labels
*Other New Features Q&A
SESSION #1 - April 9, 2008, 12:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (CST)
Go here to register: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/371854498
SESSION #2 - April 11, 2008, 12:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (CST)
Go here to register: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/798417812
SESSION #3 - April 15, 2008, 12:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (CST)
Go here to register: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/986096089
SESSION #4 - April 16, 2008, 12:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (CST)
Go here to register: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/764143830
A2J AUTHOR 2.0 IS HERE!
What’s special about 2.0?
Several enhancements, many of which were suggested by A2J Author™ users, have been included in Version 2.0. While some of the improvements in 2.0 face the pro se users of the A2J Guided Interviews™, most of the improvements make the tool more efficient and easier for the authoring community to use.
New Features for the authors of A2J Guided Interviews™ include the ability to:
- set multiple variables in a single condition;
- round and truncate numbers;
- script macros for sign text and field labels;
- script functions in either lowercase or uppercase letters;
- add unlinked questions to an interview;
- add or insert automatically numbered questions without
- disturbing the existing numbering scheme; and,
- for replicated interviews, clear all audio file references if they do not apply to the current interview.
The most prominent new 2.0 feature aimed at the user is an alternative end graphic. This feature provides the developer the ability to exchange the traditional courthouse graphic for an alternative graphic designated by the author. With the increasing popularity of the program as a means to conduct online web intake, programs will now be able to designate a graphic more in tune with the purpose of the interview.
While we are very proud to get you version 2.0, we are already hard at work on version 3.0, which promises to eclipse any of the previous versions of the software. Version 3.0 will bring video and graphics into the A2J Author interface and will deliver the import question(s) function.
Want to learn more?
Attend the next A2J Author Developer Call! We will discuss in more detail the new features and functions of A2J Author 2.0 and components of the A2J Author 2.0 Starter-Kit.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008, 10:00 a.m. (CDT)
Register for the Developer Call here: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/549827495
Ready to upgrade to 2.0?
A2J Author™ 2.0 can be downloaded at the following location: http://www.a2jauthor.org
Is the “national server” (NPADO) upgraded with 2.0?
YES. The National Public Automated Documents Online server has been upgraded with A2J Viewer 2.0, the viewer through which all of your A2J Guided Interviews will be launched on the web. Version 2.0 of the “Viewer” should not have any adverse effect on A2J Guided Interviews created in either A2J Author 2.0 or any previous version of A2J Author.
Please be ALERT to the following:
While the A2J Viewer has been tested on the development server, we do not know exactly which of the thousands of interviews uploaded to the national server are in production. It is impossible for us to test all “live” interviews on the production server. Therefore, as introduction of new software always presents some risks, we recommend that you take some time this week, or as soon as possible, to test run those interviews which are in production. It would be worth everyone’s peace of mind, and very helpful to us, to at least check those interviews that receive a lot of traffic. Please notify our office immediately if you notice any inconsistencies, by phone (312-906-5328) or email (a2j-author@kentlaw.edu).
Interested in attending A2J Author 2.0 Training?
A number of training sessions have been scheduled for the next couple of weeks. Each training session will include a new user component and an advanced component. You are welcome to attend the entire session or the first or second half. Each session will be held at 12:00 – 2:00 p.m. (CST). The agenda for each session is as follows:
12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m. (CST)
The first hour: New User Introduction to A2J Author 2.0
*Navigating A2J Author
*Adding, Inserting & Cloning Questions
*Designing Questions in A2J Author
*Adding an Alternative Graphic
1:00 p.m. – 1:05 p.m. (CST)
5-minute break
1:05 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (CST)
The second hour: “Stay after class” to learn advanced features
*Writing Conditions in 2.0
*Working with the “A2J Step” Program Variable
*Using Macros to Set Multiple Choice Labels
*Other New Features Q&A
SESSION #1 - April 9, 2008, 12:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (CST)
Go here to register: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/371854498
SESSION #2 - April 11, 2008, 12:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (CST)
Go here to register: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/798417812
SESSION #3 - April 15, 2008, 12:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (CST)
Go here to register: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/986096089
SESSION #4 - April 16, 2008, 12:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (CST)
Go here to register: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/764143830
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
North Dakota Judicial Branch Issues RFP
The State of North Dakota, Unified Judicial Branch issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 for a statewide implementation of a statewide Case Management Systems (CMS) to replace the exisiting Unified Court InformationSystem application. Proposals are due on May 21, 2008. To download the RFP and related documents go to:
http://www.ndcourts.com/rfp/cmsrfp/dates.htm
http://www.ndcourts.com/rfp/cmsrfp/dates.htm
New CMS Makes Strides in California Courts
A press release from the Judicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Courts describes progress on their CMS project:
San Francisco – The Superior Court of San Joaquin County yesterday became the most recent trial court in California to launch the California Court Case Management System (CCMS), a new technology initiative aimed at modernizing the state judicial branch and promoting information sharing among courts and other justice system agencies.
New Case Management System Makes Strides in California Courts
San Francisco – The Superior Court of San Joaquin County yesterday became the most recent trial court in California to launch the California Court Case Management System (CCMS), a new technology initiative aimed at modernizing the state judicial branch and promoting information sharing among courts and other justice system agencies.
CCMS already has been launched in Orange, Sacramento, San Diego, and Ventura Counties. Sponsored by the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), CCMS will enable all trial courts to use one application for all case categories.
The Superior Court of San Joaquin County is the first to use the system for all case types starting on day one, including civil, small claims, probate, and mental health case types.
By the end of 2012, all 58 superior courts will be using CCMS to provide better service to the public and enhance sharing of information with justice partners such as the Department of Justice and the
Department of Child Support Services.
History of Case Management System
California’s 58 superior courts are currently using about 70 different case management systems, from traditional paper filing systems to customized software programs.
In 2001, an assessment showed that a number of courts were facing critical needs because of outdated systems, deficient technical support, the inability to meet legislative and reporting requirements, and the high cost of maintenance. With the approval of the Judicial Council, the AOC launched the CCMS project a year later to address these concerns.
A primary goal of the CCMS project is to make the courts “venue transparent,” giving court users and the public the ability to conduct business from any location in California. This project supports the Judicial Council’s goal to modernize state courts and to establish statewide technology initiatives that better manage court operations and resources.
For more information on CCMS, see the California Courts Web site:
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Federal Courts IT Initiatives for 2008
The Third Branch US Federal Courts newsletter for February, 2008 contains an article titled: Local IT Initiatives Funded for FY 2008. The article discusses four project that are funded under the Edwin L. Nelson Local IT Initiatives Grant Program. The article states: "the IT grand program encourages and promotes local court technology innovations that can be shared with other courts".
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
E-Courts 2008 Agenda Available
An update to the E-Courts 2008 conference agenda has been posted to the conference website. The E-Courts conference will be held from December 8-10, 2008 in Las Vegas, Nevada. While there are a few details remaining to be finalized, the agenda will give one a good idea of this years conference content. It is anticipated that the conference session descriptions will be available soon.
Montgomery County, Ohio E-Filing Blog
Our good friend, James Drubert, the Court Administrator at the Montgomery County Common Pleas Court in Dayton, Ohio shares that they have started a blog on their E-filing project and related E-filing issues. To read and share ideas on their blog, go to:
http://www.montcourt.org:8080/wordpress/
http://www.montcourt.org:8080/wordpress/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)