It's hard to believe it's been less than three months since we officially launched IAALS Online. We hope you've been enjoying it as much as we have. We'll be taking a short break for the holidays—IAALS and the University of Denver are closed from December 25 through January 1—but we look forward to logging on January 2.

How would you feel if you owned a business with your spouse and you decided to divorce? A recent article from The New York Times provides a refreshing example of how one couple was able to maintain their business relationship while going through the divorce process.

Approximately one year ago, on November 1, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York implemented a Pilot Project Regarding Case Management Techniques for Complex Civil Cases. The Board of Judges has now extended the pilot project for an additional eighteen months, to expire September 30, 2014.

After an unsuccessful attempt in 1992 to cover the topic of divorce, Sesame Street has debuted a 13-minute, online segment entitled, "Little Children, Big Challenges: Divorce," that shows a pink fairy, known as Abby Cadabby, discussing her parents' divorce. The segment hopes to fill the void and act as a resource for parents of preschool-aged children who need a tool to help their children handle the transitions that come with divorce.

Conservative lawmakers are expected to pursue a change in the process for selecting Kansas’ appellate judges in 2013. Critics of the current process believe that lawyers have too much control, with five of the nine members of the judicial nominating commission elected by the state bar association.

The Sedona Conference® has updated its Resources for the Judiciary, a reference manual for judges that is “intended to assemble and promote a variety of proven judicial management tools to help parties develop and execute appropriate, cost-effective, cooperative discovery plans; avoid unnecessary discovery disputes; and resolve discovery disputes that may arise in a fair and expeditious manner.”

In mid-November, President Obama nominated Raymond P. Moore, a federal public defender, for a vacancy on the United States District Court of Colorado, which will open with the new year. Despite the fact that the process by which Moore was nominated mirrors versions used by twenty-one other states, there is concern that he may face a lengthy confirmation period, which has become a trend during Obama’s presidency.

Senators Dick Durbin and Mark Kirk each authorize a nonpartisan screening committee to evaluate applicants for district court vacancies and make recommendations as to the best qualified. With four open seats in Illinois and only one nomination pending, Senator Kirk recently reactivated his 14-person committee.

According to results of a recent Vanderbilt University poll, 44 percent of Tennessee voters want to elect supreme court justices, while 28 percent believe the governor should continue to appoint them. The legislature is expected to pursue changes to the process for selecting judges in 2013.

Meaningful access to justice is the most important issue confronting state courts across this country. There can be little doubt that we now have a state justice system in America that is slowly eroding while at the same time becoming increasingly too expensive for the vast majority of our fellow citizens. These developments, left unchecked, will have real consequences that will go to the very core of the American promise. They should concern us all.

Two recent events have us reflecting on the reasons why it is important to collect and share data. At IAALS, we have concluded our final study of Colorado’s Simplified Procedure (Rule 16.1), which was enacted in 2004. In Texas, the Supreme Court has newly adopted a Rule for Expedited Actions (Rule 169). Both rules intend to provide a shorter, less expensive process for smaller cases. They also have aspects similar to various short, summary, and expedited civil action programs in place around the country.

According to a system established in 1977 by constitutional amendment, the governor appoints judges to the New York Court of Appeals—the state's highest court—from names submitted by the Commission on Judicial Nomination. The Commission recently began the process of filling the first of two vacancies on the high court by offering seven names for Governor Cuomo's consideration.