Category Archives: Systematic Change

New CCJ/COSCA Resolution on 100% Access, and How to Get There, Is a Tipping Point

Posted on August 11, 2015 by richardzorza

The week before last, the Conference of (state) Chief Justices, and the Conference of State Court Administrators jointly passed two Resolutions that together predict a tipping pint forward in moving to justice.  One sets an aspirational goal of 100% access … Continue reading →

Posted in 100% Access Strategy and Campaign, Access to Counsel, Access to Justice Boards, Access to Justice Generally, Bar Associations, Communications Strategy, Court Management, Forms, Legal Aid, Mobile Technology, Outcome Measures, Political Support, Research and Evalation, Rules Reform, Self-Help Services, Simplification, Systematic Change, Technology, Triage, Unbundling | 3 Comments

Interdisciplinary Education Comes to Medicine — What About Law?

Posted on May 14, 2015 by richardzorza

A recent NYT blog highlights how medical education trains its varied professionals, doctors, nurses, physicians assistants, in totally isolated silos, even though today they almost always actually practice in integrated teams. But, there are now some changes described in the … Continue reading →

Posted in Law Schools, Medical System Comparision, Public Defender, Systematic Change | 1 Comment

DOJ ATJ Initiative Director Lisa Foster Keynotes at Equal Justice Conference

Posted on May 8, 2015 by richardzorza

As Department of Justice Access to to Justice Director Foster pointed out at her keynote at the Equal Justice Conference, yesterday (see below for full text), there have been sixteen of these Conferences.  What she did not point out was … Continue reading →

Posted in Court Fees and Costs, Criminal Law, Dept. of Justice, Funding, Research and Evalation, Self-Help Services, Systematic Change | Comments Off on DOJ ATJ Initiative Director Lisa Foster Keynotes at Equal Justice Conference

Jim Greiner Asks “What is Access to Justice For?”

Posted on March 28, 2015 by richardzorza

Jim Greiner, in a recent two part post for the Haarvard Law and Policy Review (here and here), urges that we need to decide what we are trying to achieve in our access work. He points out that without a … Continue reading →

Posted in Funding, Research and Evalation, Systematic Change | Comments Off on Jim Greiner Asks “What is Access to Justice For?”

Core Strategies for Legal System Reform

Posted on February 8, 2015 by richardzorza

I have been thinking recently about what we might think of as the core strategies for justice system reform, and here are some preliminary suggestions, on which I welcome debate: 1.     Set Ambitious Goals Grounded in Core Values and Mission … Continue reading →

Posted in Access to Justice Generally, Systematic Change | 1 Comment

Could Volvo’s No Death Goal Show The Way for Access to Justice Innovation

Posted on February 1, 2015 by richardzorza

I recently discovered that Volvo Cars has set a zero death goal for its new cars by 2020. “Our vision is that no one is killed or injured in a new Volvo by 2020,” the chief of governmental affairs is … Continue reading →

Posted in Self-Help Services, Systematic Change | 4 Comments

Wayne Moore’s Comments to the ABA on the Future of Legal Services for Moderate Income People

Posted on December 29, 2014 by richardzorza

As you know, the ABA Commission on the Future of Legal Services recently requested comments to use in its work.  While there are many worthwhile comments posted, I thought it useful to share this one in both longer (attached-linked) and shorter … Continue reading →

Posted in Middle Income, Systematic Change, Technology, Unbundling | 2 Comments

A Fabulous Job Opportunity at Voices for Civil Justice

Posted on December 16, 2014 by richardzorza

As most folks know, Voices for Civil Justice has been remaking the way we think about civil legal aid and access to justice.  While on one level it has merely been seeking the best way to talk to policy makers, … Continue reading →

Posted in Communications Strategy, Systematic Change | Comments Off on A Fabulous Job Opportunity at Voices for Civil Justice

NYT “Fixes” Column Highlights “Downshift Jobs” as Problem Solver — Consider Legal System Implications

Posted on December 12, 2014 by richardzorza

Those who are worried about the emerging trend to use more non-lawyers in the legal system, including perhaps in the courtroom, might be somewhat reassured by the evidence that this approach is being used in other professions.  Indeed, a recent … Continue reading →

Posted in Access to Justice Generally, Non-Lawyer Practice, Research and Evalation, Systematic Change, Technology | Comments Off on NYT “Fixes” Column Highlights “Downshift Jobs” as Problem Solver — Consider Legal System Implications

ABA Commission on Future of Legal Services Comments — Now Due Dec 20 — Some Challenging Thoughts

Posted on December 6, 2014 by richardzorza

Update:  The comment period has been extended to Dec 20. +++++++++++++++++++++++ I should have blogged about this weeks ago.  But the due date of Dec 10 for comments on the ABA Commission on the Future of Legal Services has almost … Continue reading →

Posted in Access to Justice Generally, Attorney-Client, Legal Aid, Systematic Change | 1 Comment

NYT Publishes First Article on Comprehensive Changes in Legal Aid (Broadly Defined)

Posted on November 24, 2014 by richardzorza

Showing the huge value and potential of a coherent communications strategy for the legal aid world (broadly defined to include both community-based and court-based legal aid) the New York Times on Saturday published its first real comprehensive article on the … Continue reading →

Posted in Access to Counsel, Communications Strategy, Legal Aid, LSC, Non-Lawyer Practice, Political Support, Self-Help Services, Systematic Change, Triage | Comments Off on NYT Publishes First Article on Comprehensive Changes in Legal Aid (Broadly Defined)

Part IV of “Assessing Innovations,” The Private Sector Legal Market

Posted on November 10, 2014 by richardzorza

Previous posts in this series have offered cost-benefit, rights-oriented  and “targeted representation” approaches to analyzing whether innovations should be viewed as appropriate.  This post asks the same question about innovations in the private sector market, although with more of a … Continue reading →

Posted in Non-Lawyer Practice, Systematic Change, Triage | 1 Comment

Evaluation of Idaho Informal Custody Trial Raises Interesting Questions

Posted on November 7, 2014 by richardzorza

For several years, Idaho has been experimenting with an “Informal Custody Trial” (ICT).  They have recently released the evaluation, and we have permission to post it on this blog here, Informal Custody Trial Evaluation Report. Big kudos to the state … Continue reading →

Posted in Court Management, Judicial Ethics, Research and Evalation, Systematic Change | Comments Off on Evaluation of Idaho Informal Custody Trial Raises Interesting Questions

Part III of “Assessing Innovations”: Guest Post by Russell Engler on the Targeted Representation Approach

Posted on November 5, 2014 by richardzorza

I am happy to guest post Russell Engler’s helpful and insightful response to Part II of my series on assessing innovations.  Part II focused on a rights-oriented analysis.  Russell writes about what he calls the “targeted representation” approach as follows: … Continue reading →

Posted in Access to Counsel, Systematic Change, Triage | 1 Comment

Part II of “Assessing Innovations” — A Rights Oriented Analysis

Posted on October 31, 2014 by richardzorza

A recent post discussed how to analyze the value of different approaches to access to justice in cost benefit terms.  This follow-up post takes a different approach, looking at the same issue — of how to decided whether to implement … Continue reading →

Posted in Access to Counsel, Budget Issues, Legal Aid, Non-Lawyer Practice, Systematic Change, Technology, Triage, Unbundling | 1 Comment