E-Filing and Acess — We Need a National Campaign

As more and more states explore e-filing, it is important to remember the critical relationship between e-filing and access to justice.

Most state level e-filing initiatives seem to be moving more slowly than anticipated.  (NCSC very useful state links here.  Court Technology Blog article on new e-filing bills in legislatures here).  Perhaps this is because so many have been set up with use by lawyers as the main goal, and with the self-represented largely forgotten.

But in so many courts, the self-represented make up the bulk of the caseload, and certainly the bulk of the work of the clerk’s office.

What is needed is a commitment, actually a national commitment, to access-friendly e-filing.  Such e-filing would:

  • Be linked to sophisticated branching Q and A document assembly that would allow users to create the documents they need to file to make their legal claims
  • Have seamlessly integrated the fee payment and fee waiver process into the software.  (For example, the software could allow for presumptive granting of fee waiver requests – this would mean that waivers would be assumed to be granted upon application, with the judge making a later decision, and the court then not taking action until the fee was paid in those cases in which the waiver was denied.  This would have the advantage of making filing possible without  credit card.
  • Working through the signature and proof of identify issues in ways that reflected the needs of communities in which not everyone has a credit card and a driving licencse.

Even without solving these problems, the process of setting up e-filing is complex and expensive.  This makes it all the more important that voices articulating these perspectives be at the table during the contracting, design, and deployment process.

At the state and local level, this means that court self-help programs and legal aid programs must ask to be brought into the process.  At the state level it means that access to justice commissions must put this on their agenda, and similarly make sure that they are included in the process. (Indeed, this example is one of the best that I know as to why we need such commissions in every state.  Current list here.)

In order to make sure that this cluster of issues is raised in every state, we need a national campaign for access-friendly e-filing.  Someone needs to be:

  • Developing Best Practices in this area (using as an intellectual base the general Washington State Access to Justice Technology Principles adopted by court order.)
  • Developing concrete policies and regulations consistent with these best practices
  • Developing educational and training materials on this approach
  • Supporting networking among those interested in the topic.
  • Acting as a resource for those advocating locally
  • Advocating nationally.

I would like to see all the national access to justice groups think about their role in this — Legal Services Corporation, National Association of IOLTA Programs, State Justice Institute, SCLAID, Access to Justice Commissions Network, National Legal Aid and Defender.

About richardzorza

I am deeply involved in access to justice and the patient voice movement.
This entry was posted in Access to Justice Generally, Technology and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to E-Filing and Acess — We Need a National Campaign

  1. Richard, I love the vision you lay out here. I wanted to touch base regarding a project I’m working on (WeJudicate) to create an open source-open API electronic filing system for the courts. It wouldn’t be exactly what you described out of the gate, but given it’s open API and open source nature, I’m confident that over time it could come to resemble the pro se friendly environment you envision.

    By way of background, I’m a 3L and a software developer. The idea behind WeJudicate took hold last summer while I was working on the Navajo Nation providing legal aid. The prior summer, I had interned with the Navy JAG in DC. Both experiences exposed me to a digital divide in the legal community. Sure, they both had access to electronic research tools like West & Lexis, but neither the Military or the Navajo court systems had electronic filing, and as I researched the state of electronic case management, I found that many legal aid organizations couldn’t even afford rudimentary systems for screening out conflicts, tracking hours, and managing active cases. In short, I found myself conducting a number of tasks and thinking, “there has to be a better way to do this.” I knew that an electronic filing system existed for the federal courts (PACER), and I knew that large law firms made use of sophisticated case management systems. So I started to ask why those tools weren’t available to large swaths of the legal community. In the end, it pretty much came down to money, and given the nature of legal services as a public good, it seemed like a market failure in need of a solution. Open source seemed a good fit, and I struck upon the idea of building two independent but complementary systems, an e-filing system for use by the courts and a case management system for use by practitioners. In addition to being open source, they’d also be open API with the idea being that they could help foster the growth of new tools for practitioners and the courts.

    Anywho, that’s a tad long for a comment. Your readers can learn more about the project on its Kickstarter page and more about me and my background at DavidColarusso.com. You can find my contact info on my site. If we meet our funding goals and move on to production, I look forward to your feedback.

Comments are closed.