Speeding up the Justice Delivery System with special reference to Procedural Reforms and use of Technology in Case Management

There is a well-known joke: A Senior Lawyer left his son, in-charge of his office. The young man was a lawyer and enthusiast about his work. Six months he managed his father’s office. His father returned. The son greeted him - said “Father what you could not do in last 25 years, I finished in six months”. Father exclaimed “What?” Son replied – “That old widow’s litigation is over. I got it settled’’. Senior Lawyer was angry. He said – “You fool! What have you done. I built this office, our house, your education out of that case. You finished the case.”



Well, that is what most lawyers think – particularly in India. They say if you complicate the system, you don’t bring an end to the litigation, it keeps giving you milk like a cow. Well that analogy may certainly hold true, if you are living in an era of shepherds. However, when you are stepping in a world of “service industry”, you are talking about production, productivity, efficiency and profit maximization. You do not talk about benefiting from delays but you talk about giving least time to a case and earn maximum out of it. So you want to be faster. You want to make sure that your case turnover is really-really very high.

To do this, a seminar on was recently conducted by the Confederation of Indian Bar. The President of India inaugurated. The Chief Justice of India Chaired the occasion and various participants included Judges of Supreme Court of India, Judges of High Courts, Attorney General of India, Solicitor General of India and lawyers of Supreme Court of India with lot of other lawyers participating from world over.

I had been a speaker on this Seminar to talk about Speeding up Justice Delivery System with special reference to Procedural Reforms and Use of Technology in Case Management.

Well, I looked over at the topic, thought if this could be a great thing to discuss. The topic has myriad of colors. Use of technology can do lot of things. It can simply bring all the papers from trial court to High Court or Supreme Court at a click of a button. It can bring you all the references in a blink of an eye. It can make your forensic much stronger. It can make you work at home, eat an ice-cream and contest your case from the court. It can monitor the trial court judges. It can measure their performance, their consistency in case decisions. The productivity can be gauged and there are so many things that can be done with the use of technology in case management.

Not that was a bit too simple. Well, let us churn the topic a bit to get the cream. We know what we can get, but there are so many moot questions to be decided and perhaps answered more strictly technically. So that is what we did with use of technology in case management. I spoke on the subjects giving various examples. Here is the brief review of the white paper that I presented on the occasion. Shortly the photographs of the occasion will be published.



Brief Overview:
“Case Management” becomes an important job-activity in legal arena when we got to wade across huge paper work in a time-bound program. The benefits that the user must get by technology for case management are: Enhanced Flexibility, increase in productivity, improving client (litigant) services, optimizing profits & reducing costs.





This can indeed be achieved if the technology can define workflows to meet specific requirements, specify procedures including automatic updates of key dates and reminders to lawyer diaries, create screen layouts for the input and display information, design document in word processing system, process multiple task simultaneously on a single matter and electronically store documents with easy and precise retrieval capacity.



Purpose:

The purpose of this paper is to present technology in case management from both the perspective: Courts and Lawyers. Case management becomes important to both the courts and lawyers. Use of technology can do much to resolve myriad of legal issues.


Discussion:

Case management refers to control of the movement of cases through a court, or a method of managing cases within the litigation process. Lawyers generally need case management software to effectively manage their caseloads.

With reference to a court, it is a sort of court process that allows a judge to monitor and manage the progress of a court case as it moves through the system. As part of international practice, it includes a process by which litigants have an opportunity to meet with a judge / jury to try and resolve their issues together.

The basic goals of any case management from court’s point of view are:

 to reduce unnecessary delay in reaching a final determination of a case
 to reduce the costs of those involved in the case
 to encourage people involved litigation to have a direct part in finding mutually satisfactory solutions





What does Case Management Software – CMS do for me as a lawyer?

Essentially, case management software consists of a database that is designed for lawyers and law firm staff to easily use to manage all of your office information. It should either replace or be used to generate many of the paper tracking systems you now utilize.

In an ideal world, CMS would encompass all of the information you use in your office and help you perform all of your daily tasks. You should look to your computer to determine anything you need to know about a case instead of looking to the paper file for one bit of information, the card file on your desk for another and your pocket calendar for a different one. Why wouldn’t any of us wish to embark on this road if the end result is one piece of software that does everything for us?

It is true that implementation of a CMS product is not an easy road. You have to carefully shop for the features you want. Then you have to integrate it with other systems. Then you have to train everyone on how to use it.

That’s okay. But does it mean using technology for mere calendaring which case is when? No. We don’t want a software that merely shows us the case timetables. We want to go beyond that. What sort of technology, do we than use?

PREREQUISITES OF A CMS (CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM):

Well some prerequisites of a case management technology should be:

COST:

Cost is not a problem if the MIS system is to be installed for a court. However, when we are in a country like India where budget allocation and resources are scarce, cost becomes important. From lawyer’s point of view, cost is important. Ideally, you want to find a program that is "scalable." This means that the software is technically equipped to grow (or shrink) with your office, and is priced according to the number of users.



SHOULD NOT BE A GLORIFIED CALENDAR MANAGER:

True case management programs offer calendaring/docketing functions as well as document management. These more sophisticated programs allow you to file all your case documents and search for them when needed. You should also look for document assembly functions, image scanning, and image storage. You should be able to organize your case details, parties, documents, discovery, exhibits, research, data, phone calls, e-mails, postal mail, dockets, appointments and your tasks. You can even recycle research and other case elements using past cases and case templates.

EASE OF USE:

Most of us are lawyers -- not programmers -- so it is essential that your case management system is easy to use for lawyers. The most intuitive systems feature tabs that mirror a lawyer's file cabinet with tabs for depositions, discovery, summons, pleadings & motions, etc.

CASE COLLATERALS:

Beyond document management, your case management program also should manage case "collateral," such as photographs, exhibits, doctor bills, etc. This allows you to scan the collateral item and label it. When you need to access it, you simply open the image.

CUSTOMIZABLE:

Lawyers, depending on the nature of their practices, need to keep track of different kinds of information. Look for the ability to customize the program. For example: if your law firm frequently uses a particular document template (i.e. Request for Medical Records), be sure the case management software includes templates for document assembly and allows you to create additional templates.

E-MAIL TRACKER:

Many programs allow you to create and send e-mail; however, most do not file the originating message. (Once it's sent, your record of the message disappears.) Therefore, you want to look for a program that files e-mail messages with the case correspondence. Some programs automatically file the response to the e-mail as well.

PORTABILITY:

More flexible case management programs include a "pack-and-go" feature that allows you to copy your case data (including exhibits) onto a CD or onto the hard drive of your laptop.

Then, while you're out and about, you can access relevant case information (without carrying around boxes of files) and even make changes and additions. Once you're back in the office or hooked up to the Internet, you can integrate (synchronize) changes and additions into the case files.

COMPATIBILITY:

I think this one is the most important of all the features. For instance, the software should be compatible to accounting software and even to word processor. For example: Let us wonder why law firms were early adaptors of computers? Word processing, of course. We take the present for granted now, but in years past legal secretaries used to spend a lot of time retyping pages that had already been typed to make a change or add something new. Whether you are a true believer in Microsoft Word or Corel WordPerfect, you have to agree that the latest word processing software packages are powerful tools. No CMS company would hope to duplicate a word processing program starting from scratch. These products have been refined and improved over many years.

So, one aspect of good case management software is that it has to interact with your word processor, for example, the name and address information from your CMS and import it into the letter to the client.

Similarly, the CMS should be compatible with say an accounting program and should be capable of importing and exporting data from a program to another.

TECHNICAL SUPPORT:

If you have ever run into problems with computer software, you know the importance of good, competent technical support. When it comes to case management, you also need to take training into consideration. "Out-of-the-box" programs may not offer any training. They leave the learning process up to you or your MIS department. For programs that offer on-site training along with the installation of the software, make sure the training is provided by the manufacturer, not a contracted consultant. There have been more than a few instances where contracted consultants or vendors have "made a mess" of an installation.

Now let us see the uses of CMS using computers, once it is installed:




USES OF CMS:

Rolodex

“Rolodex” in western parlance is a sort of folder that contains the name, address, phone, and other pertinent information of key contacts. Rolodexes include clients, interested parties, other lawyers, judges, and just about everyone else with which the lawyer / law firm has had contact. Well, that's the first major CMS function – the Rolodex. All the constituents of firm are hooked by a password with the CMS. The moment there is a change in Rolodex, it is available to everybody in the firm. No more looking in the paper file (that is, if you can even find the file) to find the client's phone number.

Case/Matter Database:

The next CMS function is to "open" the case or matter. Understanding how a new matter is created is key to understanding information flow in the firm / law department. In law firms / law departments, various pieces of the case information pass through many hands - in different formats e.g. paper form, handwritten or typed information, multiple documents and forms, papers presented at trial court, appellate court, court of revision etc. All these form a part of case data base. This will be important information about a case, list of witnesses, their statements, opposing counsels etc. All this information is right there on the paper but not in the computer. You have same paper being present in multiple places resulting duplications and cropping inefficiencies. The central case data base avoids all this.

Case Calendar

Next on the list of CMS functions is the calendar system. All the law firms maintain a case diary at trial court levels. High Court or Supreme Court provide for individual lawyer cause list. Well but they do not provide who is to file what? What is to be done next? Microsoft OutLook and Novell GroupWise provide for these facilities. But they are not CMS by themselves. So the CMS should be able to provide for the calendaring facility as well. What if you could "assign" a list of critical dates to one key date? For example, a trial date is set. All you do is schedule the trial date and time and a list of ticklers, deadlines, and appointments are automatically calendared for you. If the trial date changes, you simply change the key date and all assigned ticklers are automatically changed with it, taking into account holidays and weekends. This is called "rules-based" calendaring and is a part of many of the case management systems.

Does this mean you have to enter the same appointments and ticklers in OutLook or GroupWise as well as the CMS calendar? No; case management systems integrate with OutLook and GroupWise and merge all data into one system. No more double entry and no more synchronizing multiple calendars by frustrated legal assistants.

Case Diary

The lawyers say so many things in a court case those which are not a matter of record today. It is a matter of memory of the judge and the opposing party lawyer. How if we could simply encapsulate all this information in one go. Say a lawyer says – “I assure you that I will file my counter within a week. My steno was sick and I could not get the dictation to present the memo to the court” (In a case where counter affidavit has not been filed since 6 months). This becomes a part of case diary and the dictating machine records these words into the CMS like this:

“Court Name:__________
Court no. 4
Item no. 9.
Date: DD-MM-YYYY: Time: 12.22 p.m.
Mr. X Versus Mr. Y.

Advocate Shah – “I assure you that I will file my counter within a week. My steno was sick and I could not get the dictation to present the memo to the court”

Judge – “And you are granted this adjournment on your assurance that you will not seek any further time. Your client has already taken 6 months”.

Advocate Joshi – “Your Honor! I hope this is the last chance or else we close his right to file a counter”.

They do not form part of case records, but a sort of case diary monitoring the conduct of parties during the case. Yes, this makes every word concerning case, recordable and we make everybody responsible for what they say or did during the case.

The case diary is a key component in a case management system. This function will be used by the attorney more than any other feature because it becomes the center for case information and communications. This will constantly push up a lawyer to finish his work in time and meet with deadlines rather than failing them.

Document Generation

Just think of all those events that take place in a case. We start from trial court. In a civil case, for instance, a suit is instituted, written statement filed, counter affidavit, list of witnesses, list of exhibits (documents admitted to evidence), list of documents not admitted, statements by experts, witnesses, plaintiff, defendant etc. This is than supplemented by various papers those are created during appeals, revisions, reviews and other rounds of litigations. What if we could simply connect them with hyperlinks? Click to one document and get another. Read into the documents and relate all documents giving same message in one group. Another set of documents, not a part of litigation into another folder of the central data base & so on. Document Review process and concept searching - all in one place giving out all relevant documents at a push of a button. Same set of documents available to all the parties and to the court from same data-base.

The CMS is automatically integrated with your word processor and you need to enter data once that is updated as and when entered. CMS must provide you with one more advantage i.e. tiff-ing the paper document to images that can be altered and redacted into the CMS. We will discuss (1). Document and concept search method and (2). Tiff-ing technology later on.

You can see that by using a CMS, the legal profession can change from a "word processing-centric" environment to a "case management-centric" environment. That is, the case management system is the main system on the computer desktop - not the word processor. Everything happens from within the case management system.

Summary of CMS technology Uses:

Those are the five basic functions of computerized case management systems: rolodex, case/matter database, calendar, case diary, document generation. There are, of course, other functions that are part of the system. These include standard and customized reporting, interfaces with groupware applications and laptop synchronization to name a few. All of these various functions, and how your firm / law department / court will use them, will help you determine which system is right for your concerned entity.



CMS Assessment – What is the transition

Big question is how to implement case management is the transition from law firm’s / law department’s or court’s current procedures to the new system. There will always be a big transition, but it helps to understand how we are handling matters now. Consultants call this a "workflow analysis."

Trial court lawyers work on a particular case. They create a list of documents. They present their pleadings, take statements, argue their case, put up points of facts, points of law. In doing these activities they follow procedure prescribed by law i.e. either CPC or Cr.P.C. The questions those come to appellate courts / courts of revision or writs are: (1). Points of law; (2). Correctness of adjudication regarding points of facts & (3). Whether ratio has been consistently followed?

While presenting case to the courts they say lot of things those are informal. They have no bearing on the merits of the case, but certainly are important in understanding the conduct of parties during case right from inception to the end.

The above generally forms a work-flow analysis of any litigation. We now got to convert the paper documents to electronic documents and segregate the documents according to their messages they convey. We do this by Concept search and tiff[ing] technology.

Now by doing above, we created a CMS that has everything from Rolodex to Central data base. Now you simply give out the document references in a case and finish off your matter in shortest possible time without duplication of energy and time from one lawyer to another. What you are doing is simply log on to the Case Management System and put the system to work.

Tiff-[ing] technology

TIFF means – Tagged Image File Format. What’s that? TIFF image is simply "a digital photograph of a document." This technology is becoming a standard practice in legal industry. To be fair, TIFF imaging can be complex ¬ but a little planning and knowledge at the outset can make it a smooth, efficient and cost-effective process.

It's important to know that the primary benefits of TIFF imaging include immediate access to documents, the elimination of mis-filings, and the reduction of storage, copy and file maintenance costs. If you have a clear picture of what to expect ¬ and what not to expect ¬ you'll be more likely to gain new efficiencies without the frustration of unattained goals.

Admissibility

Necessary legislative changes ought to be ushered in to ensure that TIFF images are admissible in court. Once a TIFF image is scanned, it cannot be changed – so it should be easy to make and produce tiff images as admissible in the court.

Cost

Another common concern is cost. How expensive is imaging?

Imaging is not very expensive. Moreover, once the document is imaged, you can print it less expensively than making a second set of copies. And the storage costs are significantly less. Consider 10,000 pieces of paper on one CD-ROM, compared to those same pages stored in four boxes.

Once your firm has decided to embrace TIFF imaging ¬ or even if your firm has been using it for years -- it may help to ask yourselves a series of fundamental questions in order to better evaluate what imaging can do for you.

Tiff[ing] V/s. PDF

If some tech-guy reading this paper advocates PDF over Tiff, I have no problem with that. I doubt if lawyers will care about the formats - .pdf [or] .tif. What-ever it is, both have some advantages over the other. With use of Acrobat Pro – tif gets converted to pdf. For the purpose of this paper I have rather used tiff[ing] technology being the largest repository of documents world-wide. I won’t get into those details right now being out of the purview of this paper.

Wading documents by using “Concept Search”

Concept Searching allows you to retrieve documents based on concepts.
For example, a search for "GPS" would also automatically retrieve documents containing the phrase "Global Positioning System". This works both ways, a search for "Global Positioning System" would also find documents containing only "GPS".
The concept search can be a powerful tool in that the concept itself can be a boolean expression. E.g., Intel used the name of a River as the development name for it's 64 bit microprocessor chip, Merced. You could define a concept, "Merced" so that any time you searched for Merced, you are really searching for "Merced and not Merced River".

Concept searches solve the term mismatch problem in the sense that a concept search will return documents that relate to the same concept as the query word, irrespective of the specific word chosen by the user and the specific words in the documents. At the same time, concept searches contribute to the other fundamental goal of information retrieval systems: increasing coverage.

By returning all documents that relate to the same concept, a concept search tremendously decreases the risk of missing important documents that do not contain the exact word selected by the user but pertain to the same topic.

Two techniques can be used to perform concept searches:

Manual Techniques:

These techniques use customized thesauri and semantic networks. When a user types in a word, the system can automatically include in the query other words that belong to the same node of the semantic network. The main drawbacks of these techniques are the high cost of building, adapting, and maintaining those thesauri through human intervention and high language dependency. On the other hand, these techniques offer considerable customization and personalization capabilities.

Mathematical Models/Machine Learning Techniques.

These techniques use latent semantic indexing, Bayesian methods, and neural networks-based context vectors. These fully automated methods try to discover inherent underlying associations among words extracted from the data collection, building a query interpretation model. This model acts like a "black box" containing internal associations. The learned model is used to facilitate fuzzy searching on the resulting patterns. The main issue associated with these techniques is the lack of transparency and lack of user control over the query and results. When users obtain a result set that they find inadequate, they are left with no explanation of the inadequacy or way to improve the query or result set. Their only option is to enter another query, hoping the next trial will yield more relevant documents.

Additionally, these techniques tend to "overfit" the data, expanding queries to more generic concepts to the detriment of precision in favor of better recall.

Concept search will enable the judges and lawyers get machines do their job in arranging the documents according to their responsiveness – the entire fruits of CMS are enjoyed when the mechanism is built up.

Is Your Firm / law department / court a candidate for a CMS?

I think every law department, every firm and every lawyer should be a part of CMS offering above uses and following the pre-requisites.

There are dozens of computerized case management systems available for the legal profession. They range from general CMS systems that work in most practice areas to those specifically designed for a particular practice area. You'll find more general purpose CMS systems that can be customized that for specific systems.

For firms with multiple departments, most CMSs are customizable, meaning you can uses the same CMS, but customize the data screens, the "rules-based" calendar, the document merge, and the reporting for each department. It does take some planning effort on the part of the law firm, but having a single database in the firm is a big plus and a huge move toward increasing productivity and decreasing inefficiencies.

Success Tips for Implementing CMS

There are plenty of success stories of firms implementing CMS systems. There are also plenty of failures. The law-firm / law department reluctance to the implementation of CMS boils down to three things:

1. The Cost of CMS.

This doesn't just mean the purchase price of the CMS. You've got to include the downtime and unbillable time of the firm during the transition. Automating case management in a law firm is an intangible asset. Sure, we can touch it and feel it, but can we use it and get a return on our investment. This factor isn’t very important when it comes to courts implementing CMS.

2. Unfamiliar Territory.

Face it, lawyers are so busy they get into a routine of what needs to be done in a case and how it gets done. When you start talking about case management, you step outside that "comfort zone," something we are all very cautious about.

3. Education and Training.

This is really every-body’s job. It is important to understand the benefits of case management, and helping them to understand this will change the way we practice law to-day.

Some important tips in implementation of CMS are:

1. Case management systems are not an overnight implementation. They take time and careful planning. Very few lawyers / law department / law firms are geared for buying the software, installing it, customizing it, and learning it on their own. Depending on the CMS system, we should realistically expect a six-month to one year implementation schedule. The things that drive this time frame are: amount of customization, amount of training, and the amount of data conversion or data migration from existing case and matter information.

2. We need to have a project manager in the firm to coordinate the installation and implementation, if it’s a big firm. For smaller firms, support should come from the vendor. Lawyers and firms have to take on to this task along with the courts. This person has a lot of responsibility and, with proper planning, should be able to coordinate all efforts. This person may also have the savvy to do the customization. This should be a full-time job for the initial implementation. In other words, it needs to be a priority and this person needs a lot of support from upper level management. If it’s a vendor support, management of law-firm / solo lawyer should provide with all possible assistance.

3. Know and understand your manual system first. Without performing even a cursory workflow analysis, you cannot know or anticipate what will change when you automate these CMS functions. Document this process, because it will help you understand when you can eventually quit printing needless reams of paper and start relying more on electronic information.

4. Make a commitment from the top. If this is going to be a successful implementation, the managing partner or management committee, the executive director or the legal administrator, and the technology partner or technology committee must make this a priority. Otherwise, those involved in using the system will undoubtedly find ways not to use it.

5. Know the attorneys and staff will be going through a mental transition. You've been practicing law for many years doing the same thing the same way. Lighten up a little bit for a couple of months, helping to understand the changes people go through. Continuously communicate and "lead" the firm through the change.

Training – Key to Successful implementation of tech-savvy CMS:

We often tend to put training at the bottom of the list of investments. Law firms / law department have to train their men because that part grooms the investment put to hardware and software technology. Senior Lawyers particularly need training in their transition from paper to no-paper office.

Firms that are successful in their implementation of computerized case management take full advantage of training and the support of the developer. It's no coincidence that training increases law firm productivity. But, it has to be top-down. That is, the firm's management and administration must commit to training. Everyone using the system will benefit from training, even if it's just an overview.

Real life story:

Let me tell you a real story: Once upon a time, there was a law firm. One of the attorneys was very computer literate and pushed the firm toward improving client services with technology. The senior partner, who was not computer literate, fought tooth and nail against spending any money on these "toys." But, he was voted down. However, he refused to have a computer in his office. He backed off that, too, because the other partners convinced him the staff morale would drop if everyone did not "buy in" to the new system.

The first day back from training, the attorneys and staff were instructed to send emails to each other in order to get used to the new system. Well, the technology partner sent the senior partner an email. The senior partner took out his yellow pad, wrote an "answer" on the pad. He ripped off the sheet, walked over to the technology partner and taped the paper to the monitor. He wanted to "make a statement."

Several days later, the senior partner's secretary, who'd been with him for fifteen years, walked in and closed the door. This patient lady knew he was frustrated and wanted to help. She slowly explained the benefits of email. In this case, the senior partner's daughter was going to an out of state college. "You mean I can be working here in the morning and get an email from my daughter?" "Yes," was the quiet reply. "How much does that cost?" "Nothing. It's part of our system." "You mean I can send my daughter an email in the afternoon and she'll get it that night?" "Actually, she'll get it within a few minutes of you sending it." "And how much does that cost?" "Nothing. It's part of our system."

Well, needless to say, the senior partner figured out that email rocks and he was going to learn it, no matter what. In addition, I heard later that this senior partner, who had fought the technology project from the beginning, was now as computer literate, if not more, than the technology partner. All it had taken was a patient person to help him gently step outside his comfort zone. In most cases, that's what it takes, just a little understanding and a little help.

The Future of Computerized CMS

Case management has come a long way since the first clunky DOS-based systems. Along with other graphical-based systems, case management technology has kept up with the times.

Wireless is what most everyone is talking about. Remote computing, combined with wireless technologies allow the individual attorney to be in a virtual office. That is, you can be roaming anywhere and have instant access to your full case management system, either remotely or in the palm of your hand. Many CMS developers now-a-days offer remote access through the Internet. Most also provide laptop download and synchronization and most download information to the Palm.

There are more developers seeking business relationships with other market leaders in other business segments. For example, a CMS developer may not have a document management system, so the company is striking up a relationship with a document management system developer. Another example may be the CMS developer wants to partner with several time & billing systems, so they partner up with the industry leaders. While these relationships have been around for a while, we're starting to see a much better and greatly improved electronic interface. What does this mean to your firm? Faster, better case management system, less time devoted to individual case and more of productivity and per case returns. What does that mean for the court – of course a fine disposal rate with genuine attention being paid to all the cases – not sort of “Lok Adalats”.

Colorado State – Case Study:


Implementation of CMS at Court levels - PPP Approach vis-à-vis e-filing:


There are three alternatives to implement CMS at the court level. First is develop indigenously, second, buy off the shelf and third enter into a Public Private Partnership. It is important to state that when we talk of CMS from court’s angle, we cannot forget that CMS is a comprehensive system that must connect the law firms / solo lawyers / law departments and non-law users with the courts. Let us understand what SCAO – Colorado State Court Administrator’s Office did to resolve same problem it faced a decade back.

Decision to Build, Buy or Partner

One of the earliest issues the SCAO addressed was how to develop a statewide e-filing solution. Three major alternatives were considered: build internally, buy off-the-shelf software, or create a public-private partnership. Ultimately, the SCAO chose a public-private- partnership with LexisNexis.

Considerations for Building an E-Filing System

The SCAO concluded that building a system from the ground up would take an enormous amount of time and resources. The SCAO findings also conveyed the importance of accommodating non-court users in the legal community demonstrating that the needs of law firms were extremely important. The level of technology and scope of functionality required to develop an e-filing system was projected to be substantial. Document management, integration, security, linking of documents and data management were just some of the critical functionality considered.

Furthermore, if an internal system was developed, the State would have to fund and manage activities for training users, providing ongoing customer support, marketing e-filing to the legal community, and maintaining the system.

Buying Off-The-Shelf E-filing Systems

A second alternative for the State was to purchase an off-the-shelf solution. At the time and still today, there are few if any true off-the-shelf options for purchasing an e-filing application. The most viable option comes in the form of case management systems that include e-filing capabilities. But in addition to the substantial cost and lengthy implementation of such a solution, most case management systems include only rudimentary e-filing functionality, and little if any capabilities for law firms to effectuate service.

A Winning Combination: Public-Private Partnerships

The PPP approach was taken by the Colorado State Court Administrator’s office (SCAO). In 1995, the SCAO faced a challenging dilemma—how to deal with the increasing avalanche of paper created by a growing civil litigation caseload. The SCAO looked to a relatively new technology as a method of improving court operations—electronic filing of court documents.

The SCAO selected LexisNexis® File & Serve; successfully implemented e-filing across a variety of case types including all general civil, probate, domestic relations, and water courts.

Working with LexisNexis® in a public-private partnership, the State of Colorado demonstrated that e-filing can be implemented effectively and at relatively little cost to the court or clerk’s office.

A public-private partnership had none of the high development costs and lengthy implementation drawbacks of building internally, and offered a better mix of functionality and support activities than a “purchased” solution.

Colorado was able to shift the cost of system development, maintenance, and upgrade to private partner and away from valuable public resources. Private partner on the other hand, is able to spread the cost across many other jurisdictions while maintaining a constant flow of investment in developing system improvements— something a court is typically not equipped to do.

LexisNexis provides the service over the Internet rather than as a software application. Attorneys are able to easily file and serve documents over an Internet connection after installation of necessary CMS functionality. Meanwhile, the court gets an e-filing system that provides the ability to review incoming documents, the functionality for judges to issue orders online, and integration with the case management system—all at virtually no charge to the court. System costs are recovered through fees attorneys pay for documents filed with the court or served to other parties.

More than seventy courts across the state judicial system implemented e-filing and, according to the Colorado Supreme Court, the project was so successful that e-filing was used in over 80 percent of the district court civil cases on completion of the project.

Colorado has realized several key advantages of a public-private partnership with LexisNexis.

• No significant capital outlay required to develop the LexisNexis e-filing system

• Rapid implementation compared to other court technology projects

• LexisNexis makes continual enhancements to the system

• LexisNexis drives adoption in the legal community

With e-filing, judges access case documents in seconds and view and respond to motions online. Clerks receive, process, and retrieve documents in minutes rather than hours or days. And e-filing enables law firms to have substantially more direct control over their case file management by improving access to case information, automating case monitoring, and eliminating delivery.

LexisNexis File & Serve is integrated with the Colorado case management system and data is securely and efficiently exchanged between the two systems. This has resulted in a much more efficient intake process and has eliminated unnecessary data entry.

What we need is to allow specialists do their jobs instead developing technology products indigenously. Can we do it? Well that depends on the will of the “top”.

E-filing and CMS:

When we talk of CMS we include within that – a technology interface that eliminates papers, brings down duplication of efforts and increases productivity.

E-filing is the first step to-wards the successful implementation of CMS. If you can convert all the data to electronic form right from the point of entry, you save a lot of time you got to spend on converting existing papers to e-formats.

It is important that E-filing is introduced at the trial courts. They are points where a lot of paper documents are generated. They simply create a clutter in the entire system of workflow. For successful implementation of E-filing, the resistance levels of lawyers needs to be brought down and we got to get out of our comfort zone.

Overcoming Challenges

While the project has been a tremendous success to date, there have been challenges. Two of the biggest hurdles relate to the need for change management, and the investment in infrastructure upgrade.

The introduction of e-filing technology throughout the judicial system has impacted roles and responsibilities, streamlined workflow, and changed the nature of day-to-day interaction with the legal community. While LexisNexis File & Serve generally mirrors existing processes, there are significant differences at the intake counter and in the process for taking judicial action.

Beyond the cultural change that is required for a court to fully implement e-filing, there are infrastructure costs that may be incurred as well. These costs however, are not unique to an e-filing initiative. High-speed access to the Internet, a robust network, and an adequate number of computers are critical to a successful project. While there are no usage charges to the court for LexisNexis File & Serve, there may be costs for technology upgrades if the infrastructure requires updating, as was the case in Colorado. These infrastructure enhancements are of course likely to provide a shared benefit in an age where many court services are provided over the Internet or an internal network.

A View from the Bench

More than 1,000 Colorado judicial officers and other court users have been registered in LexisNexis File & Serve since the e-filing project went live. At any one time there are several hundred users actively using the system and realizing the benefits of what is virtually immediate access to case documents and other information. Key reasons for the increased usage include:

• No longer forced to wait for documents to be copied or retrieved from some file box buried in
the basement, judges and law clerks can search for and review thousands of motions, pleadings, exhibits and other case documents in seconds.

• No more lost or missing files.

• No more delay while filings sit in the intake queue.

Additionally, once motions are reviewed, judges are able to issue signed orders online, resulting in an even higher level of responsiveness to litigants. Key stakeholders including judges, clerks, attorneys and others who all need the same case file information can access an electronic document. The electronic filing of documents allow them to have access at anytime without the wait associated with sharing a single paper document.

An Integrated Solution

Integration with the court’s systems was a critical factor in selecting an e-filing solution. While LexisNexis File & Serve offers several options of integration with court systems, Colorado chose a fully integrated approach with their ICON case management system.

Transactions and case information are exchanged in real-time between the two systems, substantially reducing data entry activity and improving data accuracy and availability.

Alternative vendor solutions reviewed by the SCAO did not have integration options or only provided superficial or batch approaches to integration. The two-way integration between LexisNexis File & Serve and the ICON system supports the SCAO’s overall objective to create a fully integrated judicial system.

Embraced by the Legal Community

The most powerful demonstration of the success of e-filing is the level of adoption among the legal community. Even in a voluntary environment, Colorado law firms have increased their usage of LexisNexis File & Serve—some even instituting firm-wide practice standards that require electronic filing and service.

Colorado courts are receiving an average of 15,000 electronically submitted filings per week.

Today, nearly one and a half million documents are now electronically filed and served annually in the state. Thousands of law firms and eight thousand attorneys have incorporated electronic filing and service as a practice management standard.

Benefits to Law Firm:

Law firms are realizing the direct benefit of greater control over case file management with e-filing and e-service. The law firms:

• Gain improved access to case information

• Increase efficiencies through automated case monitoring

• Effectively eliminate the physical logistics of delivering documents to the court and opposing
Counsel

Additional benefits include increased cost savings. The cost of e-filing and e-service with for Colorado law firms is a fraction of the cost of paper-based filing and service—ultimately reducing the overall cost of litigation.

E-filing has become so widespread that many individual Colorado courts are now converting from voluntary to mandatory e-filing. A fully mandatory environment greatly reduces the burden on the clerk’s office—eliminating the need for double docket entry (online and off-line) and provides greater consistency for the legal community. Colorado’s county courts are in the process of joining the project and will be implemented under mandatory rules.