Standardized Forms and Instructions
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Standardized Forms and Instructions Presented by: Judge Michael Dennard Harry Jacobs Glenn Rawdon
Why Have Standardized Forms and Instructions • Increase access to courts by the underserved and poor, therefore decreasing the number of pro se litigants unsuccessful in representing themselves in court because of illegible or incorrect forms. • In 2004, 10% of the 60,000 pro se litigants in Idaho were able to effectively represent themselves in our courts.
What is the Idaho Pro Se Project? • A partnership between Idaho Legal Aid Services and the Idaho Supreme Court to develop approximately 300 civil legal automated forms for underserved self litigants.
A sampling of what will be available… Form packets for: • Divorce • Parenting Plan • Child Support Plan • Custody • Guardianship • Adult & Minor Name Change • Tenant Repairs • Landlord Eviction • Tenant Answer to Eviction • Tenant Return of Security Deposits • Misc. Domestic Violence forms • Protection Orders • Small Claims
Idaho History • Excellent support from Supreme Court on help for self-represented litigants • Standing Access to the Courts Committee appointed to recommend and implement goals • Court Assistance Office Project created in response to those recommendations • Court Assistance Offices piloted • Court Forms created
Forms Created by • Family Law Forms Committee • Landlord Tenant Subcommittee • CAOP Director • Local judges/court assistance officers
Form Development Policy Created • Standing Forms Committee • Forms created only through this committee • Requests for forms only through • CAOP Director • Supreme Court • Access to the Courts Committee • CAOP Director can pilot/test forms
Form Development Policy (contd.) • Final approval by Supreme Court • Only forms on approved or pilot list can be distributed through CAOs • Forms must be accepted by judges and clerks • Forms can be changed for non-substantive reasons by CAOP Director, who keeps a revision list and reports on revisions to the Court.
Recommendations Based on Our Experience: • Have a well defined Form Development Policy • Statewide uniformity • Mandatory acceptance by judges and clerks • Central standing committee for consistency in format, etc.
Recommendations (contd.) • Avoid local forms • Creates confusion among the users • Hard to train court assistance staff where forms differ from county to county • Causes cases to migrate • Limits delivery processes such as document assembly programs
Recommendations (contd.) • Set limits on form development • Limit to proceedings where self-representation is high • Identify proceedings where forms should not be developed • cases where appointed counsel is available • cases which involve money and there are resources to hire counsel • cases which are simply too complex-don’t encourage self-representation by creating forms
Recommendations (contd.) • Provide opportunities for input on both need and design • populate forms committee with • health and welfare representatives • private counsel-specialized practice areas • judges who will be dealing with the forms • clerks/court assistance staff • court administrators • language/communication specialists • hotdocs/A2J developer
Recommendations (contd.) • solicit statewide input from judges • educate judges, attorneys and court staff on forms • Maintain good records and distribution lists of current forms and revisions
What is Document Assembly • Automated production of standard documents by filling in variable information • Uses bridging logic • One answer can fill in multiple blanks • Allows you to save answers to use again for current and future documents
An effective document assembly program should: • Provide a diagnostic at the beginning to verify that the user is using the appropriate tool for their needs • Diagnose what forms and/or pleadings are appropriate for a given hearing/action • Use branching logic that reflects real situations • Use only a limited number of questions per screen • Offer instructions that are linked to each question in the online diagnosis process • Provide instructions on what to do with the completed forms
An effective document assembly program (contd.): • Provide clear navigation so that people do not get lost in the process • Accommodate multiple languages • Meet accessibility standards (e.g. large type) • Minimize repeated data entry • Be accessible and interactive over the internet • Allow people to save their work to finish at a later time • Include video-based help (ideally) • Be accessible 24 hours, 7 days a week
From an Idea to a Form to a Filing Harry Jacobs harry.jacobs@jud.ca.gov (415) 865-7620
Creating Forms • Word: office.microsoft.com/word • Omniform: www.nuance.com/omniform • QuarkXPress:www.quark.com/products/xpress • Many more . . .
Making Forms Available • Courthouses/Legal Service Programs • Internet Web sites • Form Books • Commercial software
Creating Filings: Fillable Word Forms • jv640word.jpg
Delivering Forms to Court • In-person delivery • FAX filing • E-Delivery: electronic documents are delivered to court (like email) and are printed and handled as traditional filings. • E-Filing: information and documents are automatically stored in court’s case and document management systems
E-Filing Environment PRIVATE/PUBLIC COURT Filer Service Provider E-Filing Manager (EFM) Clerk Review CMS/ DMS
Court FilingXML Synchronous Confirmation Asynchronous Confirmation How E-Filing Works Court Court Policy XML Filer E-Filing Manager Clerk Review Provider CMS
LSC’s Technology Initiative Grants • TIG began in 2000 with special funding from Congress to improve access to justice through technology. LSC funds projects that use the principles of Innovation, Replication, and Sustainability to: • Increase the provision of legal services to eligible persons • Ensure that eligible clients are receiving appropriate and high-quality legal assistance • For 2006 funding information go to: http://www.lscopp.com/Techsite/home.htm • See also: www.statejustice.org
