ILNews

Judiciary ready to move on appellate CMS, e-filing

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The state judiciary is moving forward with a plan to establish an appellate case management system, which someday could entail an e-filing system similar to what the federal courts currently have access to.

Late Friday afternoon, the Indiana Division of State Court Administration issued a public notice of contracting opportunity (PNCO) seeking proposals for an information technology system that would be put in place for the state’s appellate system. This move follows the February 2009 hiring of Indianapolis attorney Robert Rath to be the new director of appellate court technology, which was a position created in response to a National Center for State Courts study in 2007 about the Hoosier judiciary’s system.

Currently, the Indiana appellate case management system is one designed and built in the 1980s that has been gradually updated through the years, but largely remains the same. A new system would allow the courts to enter the 21st century, with the possibility of linking to the statewide case management system known as Odyssey, which is now implemented in about 50 trial courts and 21 counties throughout the state.

“This will be a major initiative for our courts over the next couple years, provided we can secure the necessary funding,” Indiana Supreme Court public information officer Kathryn Dolan wrote in a statement to Indiana Lawyer about the IT updates in recent months.

In the 27-page notice, the primary goals are to increase the appellate courts’ productivity and overall efficiency with a data-entry system that can produce real-time data validation. One component is to give litigants and attorneys the ability to file briefs and motions electronically and enable trial courts and clerks to file transcripts and records the same way online.

In previous interviews, Appellate Clerk Kevin Smith has told IL that a vision is to someday possibly have an online system similar to the Public Access to Court Electronic Records and Case Management/Electronic Case Files (PACER and CM/ECF). The path to that vision could take many forms and much is dependent on available funding and resources.

The notice discusses contractors considering phased development, where some aspects such as Tax Court filings, attorney discipline cases, or a certain type of case could be targeted initially. A launch of the project isn’t yet determined, the notice says.

Companies must submit their proposals and cost breakdowns by 4 p.m. Aug. 20. Questions and updates are due earlier that month, and the timeline following those submissions is still uncertain. The state hopes to have proposal evaluations at the end of September, the PNCO says. Interested vendors can register in advance for a pre-proposal conference set for July 22, by contacting Teresa Payne at tpayne@courts.state.in.us or (317) 233-1578. Details about the project and timeline can be found online at the state judiciary’s website.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  2. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  3. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  4. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  5. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

ADVERTISEMENT