News & Updates

The Conference of Chief Justices has recognized the important needs of litigants in our state courts, and has answered the call to action to improve our civil justice system by adopting the Recommendations of its Civil Justice Improvements Committee earlier this month. 

At IAALS’ Fourth Civil Justice Reform Summit, we brought together stakeholders to brainstorm a vision for the courts of tomorrow and steps to get there. Today we release the report from that summit, Creating the Just, Speedy, and Inexpensive Courts of Tomorrow: Ideas for Impact from IAALS’ Fourth Civil Justice Reform Summit.

Procedural fairness continues to be an area of great importance in the landscape of efforts to improve civil justice. The National Center for State Courts (NCSC) recently produced four informative training videos that explore how procedural-fairness principles can be applied in difficult situations often encountered in the courtroom and the clerk’s office.

Over the last three years, I have had the privilege of chairing the Conference of Chief Justices’ Civil Justice Improvements Committee, whose recommendations were adopted last week by the Conference of Chief Justices and released today. The goal of this effort was to provide specific recommendations for how Chief Justices and Court Administrators in states across the country can address cost and delay in their state civil justice systems.

A just-released report recommending concrete improvements in the American civil justice system has been endorsed by the Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ), the country’s association of top state judicial leaders. The report—released last week at CCJ’s annual conference in Jackson, Wyoming—calls on state judicial leaders to implement 13 recommendations.

This week, former New York Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman, was presented with the first-ever Mary C. McQueen Award for Excellence and Leadership in Justice System Improvement as part of the annual joint conference of the Conference of Chief Justices and Conference of State Court Administrators.

As a pro se (or self-represented) litigant, imagine being faced with an overwhelming system of protocol, etiquette, deadlines, rules, and legalese. You are expected to navigate this foreign world to keep everything you care about from breaking as it spins to the ground. This system is one that takes attorneys years to understand.

The National Center for State Courts’ 2016 Trends in State Courts includes an article focused on the impact that high-volume cases, such as consumer debt collection, landlord/tenant, and small claims, have on the overall civil caseload. Authored by…

The National Self-Represented Litigants Project (NSRLP) recently released Canadian data on case outcomes for self-represented litigants (SRLs). These new figures come shortly after NSRLP published research showing that in cases where a self-represented litigant faces a motion for summary judgment brought by a represented party, 95% of SRLs will have their cases dismissed. 

Updates to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and a rising crop of tech savvy attorneys have Magistrate Judge John M. Facciola (Ret.) of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia optimistic about the future of e-discovery.

The June edition of 5280 Magazine highlights the reality of self-representation in Colorado’s civil courts. Referencing the first-hand experience of a litigant who navigated her way through the family court process without an attorney, the article discusses how more and more Coloradoans are without legal representation in their civil case.

IAALS has been instrumental in changing the landscape of Colorado’s civil pre-trial practice. It all began with Becky Kourlis’ provocative and influential speech at the American College of Trial Lawyers annual meeting in March 2007, where she outlined the disturbing trends and challenges facing our justice system. Becky’s talk was the seed that grew into the ACTL Task Force on Discovery and Civil Justice, which was tasked with taking a hard look at these problem areas and recommending improvements. IAALS provided a wealth of information, experience, necessary guidance, and high credibility to the Task Force.

IAALS’ Honoring Families Initiative recently released two new reports focused on the experiences of self-represented litigants in our family court system: Cases Without Counsel: Research on Experiences of Self-Representation in U.S. Family Court and Cases Without Counsel: Our Recommendations after Listening to the Litigants.

Lawyers reach out to me from time to time to give me a dose of reality. Recently, a trial lawyer spoke to me of a few cases that had gone awry—and are examples of larger issues that plague our civil justice system. She did not give names, or case numbers, or jurisdiction, so if any of you reading this recognize yourselves, be assured that I do not.

Today, IAALS unveiled two new reports—one of which captures the experiences of litigants navigating U.S. family courts without attorneys, and the other makes recommendations for courts and others to help better serve these litigants. There is broad consensus that, in some courts, upwards of 80–90% of family cases involve at least one self-represented party. In many instances, when parties are not represented, difficulties arise for litigants and courts alike. Cases Without Counsel highlights a very real justice gap and gives urgency to the challenge of creating client-centric family law courts and processes.

Changes to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure are on the horizon. Scheduled to take effect on December 1, 2016, the amendments “will affect the maximum permitted length of briefs, the time available for responding to briefs and motions that…

The federal rule amendments that went into effect on December 1, 2015, represent the culmination of years of effort dedicated to improving our civil justice system in the federal courts. While we recognize it took much hard work to get this far, to…

The April edition of Court Manager—the monthly publication of the National Association for Court Management (NACM)—featured an article by Brittany Kauffman, Director of IAALS’ Rule One Initiative. Entitled “ Change the Culture, Change the System: A…

The National Center for Access to Justice at Cardozo Law School recently released the Justice Index 2016—an updated version of the 2014 Index.

The use of social media by jurors is a growing problem. In response, California passed a state law in 2011 making violations punishable by contempt. Since then, such misconduct has only increased as jurors become even more technologically savvy and connected via smartphones.