News & Updates

The outcomes of the IAALS/ABA Better Access through Unbundling conference include specific directions and recommendations to make unbundling an even more significant way to advance affordable access to legal services. Now is the time to bring stakeholders together, solidify strategic plans, and dedicate resources to the advancement of unbundling.

The State of Oregon continues to blaze a trail in civil justice reform. A new report from the Oregon Judicial Department, released at the end of June, contains recommendations to improve civil justice in the state, and it provides a master class for other states looking to reform their own systems.

IAALS offers this new report for legal practitioners, service providers, and other access to justice advocates, which details the themes, recommendations, and strategic plans that emerged from our Better Access through Unbundling Conference—with takeaways for every jurisdiction, whether or not they have embraced unbundling to this point.

Since 2015, the amicable app has been helping couples in the United Kingdom facilitate their divorces. “At amicable, we believe that once a couple has made the difficult decision to separate, whatever the reasons, the emphasis should be on separating in the least painful way possible and, if children are involved, putting them first," said app co-founder Kate Daly.

The IAALS Court Compass project is exploring streamlined and simplified solutions that help people through the divorce and separation process. IAALS is partnering with the North Carolina Judicial Branch and the North Carolina Equal Access to Justice Commission to bring a design sprint workshop to Raleigh on August 11, 2018.

The issue of how to provide litigants with equal access to legal services, regardless of the litigant’s financial status, has plagued the legal community for some time now. One solution that is gaining popularity is unbundled legal services, where lawyers work on and charge clients for only those tasks that they agree to in advance.

For litigants without the help of an attorney, the American civil justice system can be difficult to understand—let alone navigate. In a recent piece for the ABA Journal, Chancellor Professor of Law Frederic I. Lederer proposed several technological advancements that can help improve access to legal resources and litigant understanding of the process.

As part of our three-year project to support the modernization and transformation of civil litigation in our state courts, IAALS has helped facilitate a series of regional strategic planning summits to help states develop an action plan for reform or other activities in their respective jurisdictions.

The National Self-Represented Litigants Project (NSRLP) recently published a paper that looks at costs awards to self-represented litigants (SRLs) in Canadian courts. The paper notes the leading Canadian cases in which SRLs have been ordered costs awards and analyzes the development of these principles in family law matters. Generally, the report concludes that Canadian courts have broadened SRLs’ ability to obtain costs. 

The ABA Center for Innovation launched a new project in April that will provide legal aid organizations with free technology that will hopefully make them more efficient and able to help more clients. The project, called "Legal Tech for a Change,” will allow the Center for Innovation to serve as a broker between legal aid organization grantees and established legal technology companies. The Center will also vet potential technology solutions.

IAALS’ own Natalie Knowlton was recently interviewed for a Chicago Tribune advice column for self-represented litigants about the problems they face and the tools available that can help increase access to justice for those navigating the legal system without a lawyer.

Changes in recent years to California’s budget, priorities, and policies have resulted in a focus on criminal over civil matters. In the yearly State of the Judiciary address, however, California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye highlighted some of the ways California is planning to improve access to justice in its courts. Among them: better meeting the needs of self-represented litigants.

The IAALS Court Compass project is exploring streamlined and simplified solutions that help people through the divorce and separation process. While the project aims to make the process better for all litigants, there is a particular focus on people who go to court without an attorney. The Court Compass project is employing a number of human-centered design tools, including in-person design sprints and other focus groups to test new processes and solutions in real time and refine them based on user feedback. IAALS and the Iowa Judicial Branch are partnering to bring a design sprint workshop to Des Moines later this month.

FreeFrom, a Los Angeles-based nonprofit, is releasing a self-help tool aimed at helping survivors of domestic abuse get the resources and information they need to pursue financial compensation. Many victims of domestic abuse never seek legal relief, simply because they don’t know what options they have or how to pursue them.

Illinois takes judicial education seriously. In 2015, the state Supreme Court formed the Illinois Judicial College, and very recently I was honored to participate in its first full-week debut of courses. Over 400 judges participated and there were over 100 course offerings for them. At the initial plenary session, there was energy in the room—colleagues enjoying being together, eager to learn new things and share information.

As part of the University of Denver’s Engaging Ideas series, IAALS Executive Director Rebecca Love Kourlis was interviewed about the importance of an independent judiciary—and IAALS’ model for sustaining it. In the video, titled “Judging the Judges,” Kourlis discusses how IAALS is helping improve state court systems through the O’Connor Judicial Selection Plan. “Public trust in the judiciary is central to its legitimacy and to its capacity to enforce its orders. Retaining that impartiality, independence, and integrity of the judicial branch, I think in this day and age, is more critical than perhaps it’s ever been.”

By now, the word is out that Judge Richard A. Posner is retiring from the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. His retirement was unexpected, but his stated reasons for doing so shouldn’t be. In correspondence announcing his departure, Judge Posner sites apparent “difficulty” with his colleagues on the bench over the treatment of self-represented litigants as the motivation to leave the bench. A prompt response from Chief Judge Diane P. Wood, also on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, countered Judge Posner’s claim by stating, in part, “the judges and our staff attorneys take great care with pro se filings.” Judge Posner’s point, though, is more indicative of the entire justice system than a particular court and its staff attorneys.

A recent study conducted for Voices for Civil Justice, with support from the Public Welfare Foundation, found that voters strongly favor reform of the civil justice system. Overwhelming majorities of voters believe it is important to “ensure that everyone has access to the civil justice system” and “strongly support a wide range of services to enhance access.” Moreover, voters support increasing state funding to build a more accessible civil justice system. The survey highlights that equal justice under the law in our society is fundamental, with voters considering it a right, not a privilege.

In three quarters of all civil cases, at least one party is going to court without an attorney and navigating a legal system not designed for the layperson’s use. To help potential litigants, some courts are leveraging technology and developing websites and portals that offer a vast amount of information and resources. However, these offerings vary widely in courthouses across the country. With the goal of helping bridge what has become an access-to-justice gap, IAALS today announced the release of Court Compass: Mapping the Future of User Access Through Technology, a compendium and analysis of court-offered solutions for self-represented litigants (SRLs), along with maturity models to guide the development of integrated solutions in courts nationwide.

The Rule of Law is absolutely under attack in the United States of America—from elected officials, state legislative bodies, and groups of individuals. The attacks are apparent in politicians’ tirades, legislative proposals that would limit the authority of courts, and assaults on established principles of law such as federal versus state authority. But, the solution is not to put sandbags along the perimeters and bemoan the idiocy of some people.