CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT AND
DELAY REDUCTION IN COURTS
David C. Steelman
National Center for State Courts
World Bank Presentation, June 24, 2004
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
CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT
The Heart of Court Management
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.
How (and why) did the theory and
principles of caseflow management
develop in the United States?
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)
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

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

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.”
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.

What Has Research Shown To Be The
Essential Elements of Successful
Caseflow Management in U.S. Courts?
Apply
Caseflow
Principles
Exercise Active
Management:
Set Goals, Monitor
Performance, and Enforce
Accountability
Establish and Maintain a Secure
Management Foundation:
Exercise Leadership, Stay Committed to a
Shared Vision of Timely Justice,
Communicate, and Promote a Learning Environment
Apply
Caseflow
Principles
Exercise Active
Management:
Set Goals, Monitor
Performance, and Enforce
Accountability
Establish and Maintain a Secure
Management Foundation:
Exercise Leadership, Stay Committed to a
Shared Vision of Timely Justice,
Communicate, and Promote a Learning Environment
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
EXAMPLES OF EXPECTATIONS
FOR CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT
Time Standards
 Backlog reduction & size of pending
inventory
 Continuance policy
 Controlling costs of justice
 Maintaining equality, fairness & integrity

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION
TIME STANDARDS
Time to Disposition (in Months)
90 Pct
98 Pct
100 Pct
General Civil
12
18
24
Domestic Relations
3
6
12
Felony
4
6
12
Misdemeanor
1
--3
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
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

Apply
Caseflow
Principles
Exercise Active
Management:
Set Goals, Monitor
Performance, and Enforce
Accountability
Establish and Maintain a Secure
Management Foundation:
Exercise Leadership, Stay Committed to a
Shared Vision of Timely Justice,
Communicate, and Promote a Learning Environment
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

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
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

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
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
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

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 postdisposition links to other cases
 Determine when all court work is done

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
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
MANAGING BUSINESS &
COMPLEX LITIGATION


Monitor case progress
from filing to disposition
in view of time standards
Provide early & active
judge involvement:

– 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
– 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:

Provide appropriate early
& firm trial date
HOW APPLICABLE ARE CASEFLOW
MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES IN COURTS
OUTSIDE THE U.S.?
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
EGYPTIAN COURTS OF
FIRST INSTANCE
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
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
CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT
CHANGE IN ITALY?
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
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

HOW DO WE CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT IN
WHICH CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT
IMPROVEMENTS MIGHT FLOURISH?
Apply
Caseflow
Principles
Exercise Active
Management:
Set Goals, Monitor
Performance, and Enforce
Accountability
Establish and Maintain a Secure
Management Foundation:
Exercise Leadership, Stay Committed to a
Shared Vision of Timely Justice,
Communicate, and Promote a Learning Environment
ESTABLISHING A SECURE
MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT
SUITABLE FOR CASEFLOW
MANAGEMENT SUCCESS
 Leadership
 Commitment
to shared vision
 Communications
 Learning Environment
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
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

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

LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
 Specific
education and training about
caseflow management
 Emphasis on learning in the court and
the judicial system
 Court as a “learning organization”
CONCLUSION:
CASEFLOW MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT
AND THE CHALLENGE OF CHANGE
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
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.
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 shortwinded” (Arthur Vanderbilt).
ANY QUESTIONS?
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,
http://www.ncsconline.org/WC/Publications/KIS_
ReengiBPEManual.pdf)