1. CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT AND DELAY REDUCTION IN COURTS
David C. Steelman
National Center for State Courts
World Bank Presentation, June 24, 2004

2. NATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURTS
A non-profit organization serving state and local courts in the US and justice systems abroad
Mission: To promote justice through leadership and service to courts
Consulting and technical assistance
Information and education
Research and technology
International programs
Association services

3. CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT The Heart of Court Management

4. CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT
The entire set of actions that a court takes to monitor and control the progress of cases, from commencement through trial or other initial disposition to the completion of all postdisposition court work, in order to make sure that justice is done promptly.

5. How (and why) did the theory and principles of caseflow management develop in the United States?

6. HISTORY OF DELAY IN AMERICAN COURTS
U.S. Constitution, 6th Amendment (1789): “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have a right to a speedy and public trial.”
“Speedy justice is a thing unknown; and any justice, without delays almost ruinous, is most rare” (David Dudley Field, 1839)
In Beavers v. Haubert (1905), the U.S. Supreme Court held that what is a “speedy” trial depends on individual case circumstances (and can be consistent with delays).
“The causes of popular dissatisfaction with the administration of justice [include] uncertainty, delay and expense” (Roscoe Pound, 1906)
“Complaints about the evil of delay in litigation come from every quarter of American society” (Arthur Vanderbilt, 1957)

7. U.S. REFORM EFFORTS TO REDUCE DELAY BEFORE 1970’S
Simplify court structure & jurisdiction
Streamline rules of procedure
Reassign judges to reduce backlog
Reduce case volume
Increase court resources
Use short-term “crash programs” to reduce court backlogs

8. A “SEA CHANGE” IN U.S. THINKING ABOUT DELAY IN THE 1970’S
US Supreme Court due process mandates
Judicial administration standards
Emergence of professional court managers
Federal government policies and grants
Studies finding that court delay does not necessarily correlate with case volume, court size, or other structural features

9. REFLECTIONS OF CHANGING U.S PHILOSOPHY IN 1970’s
Maureen Solomon (ABA 1973): Judges must be committed to controlling case progress & must have assistance of court managers.
Steven Flanders (FJC 1977): Fastest federal trial courts monitor pleadings, set times for discovery completion, & provide prompt trials.
Thomas Church (NCSC 1978): Urban trial courts with speediest pace of litigation have changed expectations of “local legal culture.”

10. THE “NEW” CONVENTIONAL WISDOM ABOUT DELAY REDUCTION IN U.S. COURTS
Court delay cannot be ascribed solely to court size, caseload, case mix, or trial rate.
Solutions based on court resources or formal rules and procedures are not sufficient to reduce delay.
To reduce and avoid delay, court leaders must have a long-term commitment to active management of the pace of litigation.

11. What Has Research Shown To Be The Essential Elements of Successful Caseflow Management in U.S. Courts?

14. WHAT DO WE MEAN BY “ACTIVE MANAGEMENT”?
Setting appropriate expectations
Using IT data and other information to monitor and measure actual events in light of expectations
Taking responsible steps to bring actual performance closer to expectations

15. EXAMPLES OF EXPECTATIONS FOR CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT
Time Standards
Backlog reduction & size of pending inventory
Continuance policy
Controlling costs of justice
Maintaining equality, fairness & integrity

16. AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION TIME STANDARDS
Time to Disposition (in Months)
90 Pct Pct Pct
General Civil
Domestic Relations
Felony
Misdemeanor

17. USING INFORMATION TO MONITOR AND MEASURE ACTUAL CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE
Caseload Clearance: Number of cases cleared as percentage of total cases filed
Case Processing Time: Percentage of cases reaching initial disposition within established time standards
Case Backlog: Percentage of pending cases that are older than established time standards
Trial Date Certainty: Average number of times cases must be scheduled for trial before they are actually tried or otherwise disposed

18. ACCOUNTABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY
Enforcing accountability in caseflow management:
Court system responsibility for providing results for citizens
Case-by-case responsibility of judges, lawyers, and court staff members
Reporting performance against expectations
Taking responsible steps to improve actual performance in terms of expectations
Applying appropriate techniques consistent with caseflow management principles

20. CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES FOR U.S. COURTS
Early & continuous court control of case progress
Differentiated case management
Meaningful events & realistic schedules
Firm & credible trial dates
Trial management
Management of court events after initial disposition

21. EARLY & CONTINUOUS COURT CONTROL
“Early control” means that court uses IT to monitor case progress from initiation and creates a schedule for case progress to disposition
Early court involvement recognizes that 95% of cases in U.S. are disposed without trial
Continuous control -- each case always has a next scheduled event
Court objective: resolve cases at earliest appropriate point in process

22. DIFFERENTIATED CASE MANAGEMENT (DCM)
Early case screening for complexity based on established criteria
Assignment of cases to unique processing tracks based on screening assessment
Different court management procedures for each track
Variety of case assignment systems, best suited to each track

23. MEANINGFUL EVENTS & REALISTIC SCHEDULES
Maxims of caseflow management in U.S.:
Lawyers settle cases, not judges
Lawyers settle cases when prepared
Lawyers prepare for meaningful events
Management Techniques:
Set events on a short schedule -- long enough to allow preparation, short enough to encourage preparation
Create realistic expectation that events will happen when scheduled

24. EARLY & FIRM TRIAL DATES
Causes parties to be prepared for trial, and in U.S. most settle their cases
Methods:
Maximize dispositions before setting trial dates
Use IT data to aid creation of realistic calendar setting levels
Create & have judges consistently enforce a reasonable policy limiting continuances
Have backup judge capacity

25. TRIAL MANAGEMENT
Prepare for trial with trial management conference, especially in more serious cases
Schedule to start trials on time & provide adequate time for them
Manage jury selection
Maintain trial momentum
Establish & enforce time limits
Jury versus nonjury trials

26. MANAGEMENT OF CASES AFTER INITIAL DISPOSITION
Monitor status of cases after entry of judgment
Create appropriate time expectations and control pace of post-disposition events
Use IT to identify and manage any post-disposition links to other cases
Determine when all court work is done

27. CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT FOR FELONY CASES
Use IT to monitor time from arrest to disposition in terms of time standards
Assemble key participants & critical case information early in case
Early determination of eligibility for public defender
Early public defender involvement & contact with client
Early provision of “discovery package” from prosecutor to defense
Screen case for DCM track assignment
Actively manage pretrial events
Scheduling order
Early decisions on motions, especially suppression motions
Prosecutor-defense pretrial conference with realistic plea offer
Plea cut-off date
Provide early & firm trial date

28. CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT FOR GENERAL CIVIL CASES
Monitor case progress from filing to disposition in view of time standards
Provide early court involvement & control
Monitor filing of responsive pleading
Default judgment/dismissal for want of prosecution
Early case conference & scheduling order
Early referral to ADR
Screen case for DCM track assignment
Require attorneys to attach “case information sheet” (CIS) at filing to inform court about nature of case
CIS includes counsel request for track assignment
Track assignment controls time to discovery completion & other details of case progress
Manage discovery & pretrial motions
Provide early & firm trial date

29. MANAGING BUSINESS & COMPLEX LITIGATION
Monitor case progress from filing to disposition in view of time standards
Provide early & active judge involvement:
Case management schedule
Frequent & meaningful case status conferences
Direct availability to resolve case management disputes & problems
Provide early access to alternative dispute resolution (ADR)
Make effective use of IT:
Electronic filing, notices, and case communication
Videoconferencing & database technologies
Interactive software to integrate key filings with references to statutes & case law
“High Tech” courtroom with presentation software for effective presentation of trial evidence
Provide appropriate early & firm trial date

30. HOW APPLICABLE ARE CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES IN COURTS OUTSIDE THE U.S.?

31. CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT EFFORTS BY NCSC’S INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS DIVISION
Projects with demonstrable results:
Dominican Republic: work with courts and prosecutors dramatically increased dispositions and cut times to disposition in half
Egypt: delay reduction effort through caseflow management with IT reduced civil times to disposition by 42% in pilot courts
Projects with results still pending:
Bangladesh: Pace of litigation under study & caseflow management model under development
Nepal: Study of Supreme Court has led to suggestions to reduce disposition times & size of pending inventory
Croatia: IT & system changes in largest court (Zagreb) to promote fair & efficient case dispositions

32. EGYPTIAN COURTS OF FIRST INSTANCE

33. PROPOSED CIVIL CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR EGYPT PILOT COURTS (1998)
Leadership by Ministry of Justice & Pilot Court Chief Justices
Time Standards
Active court supervision of service of process
Monitoring of case progress from time of filing
Court control of timely case preparation by parties
Court control of work by experts
Case held for judgment at early & firm date

34. DRAFT EGYPTIAN NATIONAL DELAY REDUCTION PLAN FOR CIVIL CASES (2002)
Active management of cases by judges
Judge screening of cases for referral to experts & judge management of expert work
Management of case papers to facilitate monitoring by judges
Time standards
“Statement of Procedures” form for judges to control scheduling of hearings
Active exploration of possible amicable settlement
Active use of IT resources
Implementation plan & timetable

35. CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT CHANGE IN ITALY?

36. IDEAS FOR CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT IN BOLOGNA GENERAL-JURISDICTION TRIBUNAL
Attention to resource problems (staff & facilities)
Commitment by judges to active caseflow management
Time standards and active monitoring of case age
Emphasis on early plea bargains and summary trials (criminal) and agreed settlements (civil)
Policy discouraging trial date continuances in criminal cases
Early scheduling orders for civil cases to proceed promptly to court decision phase

37. BARRIERS TO CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT IN ITALY
Education and socialization of judges, prosecutors, and lawyers
Leadership of judiciary
Background and status of court managers
Judicial independence
Requirements of law and procedure
Distrust of government and political conflict

38. HOW DO WE CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENTS MIGHT FLOURISH?

40. ESTABLISHING A SECURE MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT SUITABLE FOR CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT SUCCESS
Leadership
Commitment to shared vision
Communications
Learning Environment

41. LEADERSHIP
With time standards, probably the most important element of success
Attributes include capacity to establish and communicate a compelling vision, political skill, tenacity, and continuity
Has come from different sources in U.S:
Leadership by a court’s Chief Judge or Presiding Judge
Judicial system leadership
Leadership from bar or other sources
Chief Judge-Court Manager executive team

42. COMMITMENT TO SHARED VISION
Performance expectations for courts that include prompt and affordable justice
Judge commitment to managing pace of litigation
Court staff involvement & understanding
Support from others with an interest in the court process

43. COMMUNICATION Among judges Between judges and court staff
Within judicial system
With members of the private bar
With court-related government agencies
With others interested in courts
Caseflow management committees

44. LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
Specific education and training about caseflow management
Emphasis on learning in the court and the judicial system
Court as a “learning organization”

45. CONCLUSION: CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT AND THE CHALLENGE OF CHANGE

46. THE CHALLENGE OF CHANGE
It should be kept in mind that there is nothing more difficult to carry out nor more doubtful of success nor more dangerous to manage than to introduce a new system of things; for the introducer has as his enemies all those who benefit from the old system, and only lukewarm defenders in all those who would benefit from the new system.
--Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince (1513), Chapter VI

47. KINDS OF RESISTANCE TO CHANGE
Internal Individual Resistance: For an individual judge or court staff member, fear that change will cause loss, or belief that change does not make sense.
Internal Group Resistance: Perception among groups of judges or groups of court staff that change will lead to a less desirable work situation.
External Resistance: Opposition to change from members of the “local legal culture,” who have learned how to operate effectively in the existing environment.

48. INITIAL THOUGHTS ON CHANGE MANAGEMENT IN COURTS OUTSIDE THE U.S.
Develop a compelling set of performance expectations.
Seek champions among leaders of the Court of Last Resort, the National Association of Judges and Prosecutors, and the Ministry of Justice.
Find ways to encourage and empower individual judges, court managers, and court staff members, trying to minimize retribution, resignation, and cynicism.
Be flexible:
Look for ways to achieve small victories.
Be prepared to respond quickly to unanticipated opportunities.
Always remember that “Court improvement is not for the short-winded” (Arthur Vanderbilt).

49. ANY QUESTIONS?

50. TWO SOURCES OF FURTHER INFORMATION
David Steelman, with John Goerdt and James McMillan, Caseflow Management: The Heart of Court Management in the New Millennium (2000)(now available in re-formatted 3rd printing)
David Steelman, Business Process Enhancement Manual (Sacramento, CA, and Williamsburg, VA: Search, Inc., and National Center for State Courts, for COSCA/NACM Joint Technology Committee,