Tweet
State Bar Association Report Highlights Negative Impacts of Budget Cuts on State Courts
ALBANY, NY (01/18/2012)-- Past cuts in the funding of New York's state courts are having a negative impact on families, children, civil litigants, criminal defendants, judges, attorneys and court employees, concludes a report issued today by the New York State Bar Association.
• Family Court cases not completed during reduced court hours may be adjourned days or weeks, disrupting children and families of divorce during their time of crisis and resulting in extra delays and expenses.
• Criminal defendants may spend extra time in jail because they can't get a timely arraignment hearing. Mandatory midday closures of the court make it harder for their attorneys to schedule settlement conferences.
• Litigants and attorneys have expressed concern that, in some cases, jurors are cutting short deliberations and rendering "unjust" verdicts.
• An attorney representing a client on a motion in state Supreme Court is told not to return for at least 60 days because court clerks can't find more timely openings on an overcrowded court docket.
• People wait in long lines to get through metal detectors at some New York City courthouses at the start of the day and again after lunch, as overcrowded court dockets and reductions in court security slow the process to the point where it creates disruptions and delays in cases.
These are just a few examples of what has been happening in courthouses across the state as a result of state cutbacks in judicial funding. The comprehensive State Bar report documents how budget cuts endanger the effectiveness and efficiency of the courts and their ability to keep up with the growing caseloads.
Court financing has not kept up with the growing demands on our judiciary.
The dispensation of justice -- like the construction of a courthouse -- is hardly free," the report states. "There are substantial costs to operating the judicial system -- from running courtrooms to preserving precedents. These costs are borne by the public, which wants in return a sense of confidence in our court system. However, adequate funding is necessary to ensure that 'essential' sense of confidence."
New York's court system has experienced a 12 percent increase in the total caseload statewide during the past decade. Yet despite that increase, the state judicial budget was reduced by $170 million during the 2011-12 fiscal year after several years of flat spending. The proposed 2012-13 budget remains at essentially the same reduced level.
"The need to provide justice to all, particularly to the disadvantaged -- though greater than ever in this economic downturn -- is not being met," the report states. "In all of these ways, recent reductions in state court funding have been very costly."
"Court spending reductions affect real people. They affect children, who are already burdened with family strife and violence. They affect poor people and minorities. They affect businesses seeking to expeditiously resolve disputes. They affect citizens seeking nothing more from the court system than a fair and timely resolution to their legal problems," said State Bar President Vince E. Doyle III of Buffalo (Connors & Vilardo).
The "Report of the Executive Committee on the Impact of the Recent Budget Cuts in New York State Court Funding" draws from interviews and surveys of administrative and trial judges, local bar associations, practicing attorneys and State Bar members from all 13 judicial districts. Participants were asked detailed questions about the impact of funding cuts on the courts in their respective jurisdictions.
"Recent reductions in state court funding have been quite costly," the report observes. "Although state fiscal restraints are very real in this economy, additional and imminent investment in the state court system is necessary. It is necessary to restore a sense of confidence in the judicial system, which ultimately is priceless."
The report identifies a number of measures, some of which already have been implemented in some jurisdictions, to help improve the operation of the courts. Among the innovations born from austerity are cross-training of court employees, development of online research tools and forms, and increased use of e-filing and teleconferencing.
These actions are helpful, the report concludes, but they will not by themselves solve the system's overriding problems. To improve efficiency, reduce delays and case backlogs, and ensure the overall fair administration of justice, the courts need more money, more personnel and more resources.
ALBANY, NY (01/18/2012)-- Past cuts in the funding of New York's state courts are having a negative impact on families, children, civil litigants, criminal defendants, judges, attorneys and court employees, concludes a report issued today by the New York State Bar Association.
• Family Court cases not completed during reduced court hours may be adjourned days or weeks, disrupting children and families of divorce during their time of crisis and resulting in extra delays and expenses.
• Criminal defendants may spend extra time in jail because they can't get a timely arraignment hearing. Mandatory midday closures of the court make it harder for their attorneys to schedule settlement conferences.
• Litigants and attorneys have expressed concern that, in some cases, jurors are cutting short deliberations and rendering "unjust" verdicts.
• An attorney representing a client on a motion in state Supreme Court is told not to return for at least 60 days because court clerks can't find more timely openings on an overcrowded court docket.
• People wait in long lines to get through metal detectors at some New York City courthouses at the start of the day and again after lunch, as overcrowded court dockets and reductions in court security slow the process to the point where it creates disruptions and delays in cases.
These are just a few examples of what has been happening in courthouses across the state as a result of state cutbacks in judicial funding. The comprehensive State Bar report documents how budget cuts endanger the effectiveness and efficiency of the courts and their ability to keep up with the growing caseloads.
Court financing has not kept up with the growing demands on our judiciary.
The dispensation of justice -- like the construction of a courthouse -- is hardly free," the report states. "There are substantial costs to operating the judicial system -- from running courtrooms to preserving precedents. These costs are borne by the public, which wants in return a sense of confidence in our court system. However, adequate funding is necessary to ensure that 'essential' sense of confidence."
New York's court system has experienced a 12 percent increase in the total caseload statewide during the past decade. Yet despite that increase, the state judicial budget was reduced by $170 million during the 2011-12 fiscal year after several years of flat spending. The proposed 2012-13 budget remains at essentially the same reduced level.
"The need to provide justice to all, particularly to the disadvantaged -- though greater than ever in this economic downturn -- is not being met," the report states. "In all of these ways, recent reductions in state court funding have been very costly."
"Court spending reductions affect real people. They affect children, who are already burdened with family strife and violence. They affect poor people and minorities. They affect businesses seeking to expeditiously resolve disputes. They affect citizens seeking nothing more from the court system than a fair and timely resolution to their legal problems," said State Bar President Vince E. Doyle III of Buffalo (Connors & Vilardo).
The "Report of the Executive Committee on the Impact of the Recent Budget Cuts in New York State Court Funding" draws from interviews and surveys of administrative and trial judges, local bar associations, practicing attorneys and State Bar members from all 13 judicial districts. Participants were asked detailed questions about the impact of funding cuts on the courts in their respective jurisdictions.
"Recent reductions in state court funding have been quite costly," the report observes. "Although state fiscal restraints are very real in this economy, additional and imminent investment in the state court system is necessary. It is necessary to restore a sense of confidence in the judicial system, which ultimately is priceless."
The report identifies a number of measures, some of which already have been implemented in some jurisdictions, to help improve the operation of the courts. Among the innovations born from austerity are cross-training of court employees, development of online research tools and forms, and increased use of e-filing and teleconferencing.
These actions are helpful, the report concludes, but they will not by themselves solve the system's overriding problems. To improve efficiency, reduce delays and case backlogs, and ensure the overall fair administration of justice, the courts need more money, more personnel and more resources.
Comment