Performance of the District Courts

Fiscal Year 2014 - 2015

Back

GOAL 2: TO MEET ALL RESPONSIBILITIES TO EVERYONE AFFECTED BY THE COURT AND ITS ACTIVITIES IN A TIMELY AND EXPEDITIOUS MANNER


Objective

2.1 To encourage timely case management and processing.

Intent of the Objective

The American Bar Association, the Conference of Chief Justices, and the Conference of State Court Administrators have all recommended that courts adopt processing time standards. The Louisiana Supreme Court adopted aspirational time standards in 1993 for itself, the courts of appeal, and for general civil, summary civil, and domestic relations cases at the district court level. At the Supreme Court and the courts of appeal, performance against time standards is measured using automated case management information systems. At the district court level, however, performance against time standards cannot be easily measured due to generally low levels of automation in the courts. Time standards are also included in the Louisiana Children’s Code in the form of maximum time limits for the holding of hearings in Child in Need of Care cases and other types of juvenile cases. However, performance against these time standards cannot be easily measured due to a general lack of automation in the courts handling these cases. This objective focuses on strategies for developing interim manual case management systems and techniques while automated case management information systems are being developed. The objective also focuses on timeliness as it relates to the commencement of proceedings.

Responses To Objective

  1. Actions taken in FY 2014-2015 to reduce delays and improve case management.

QuestionIdQuestionStatementResponse
857691190What actions, if any, did your court take in FY 2014-2015 to reduce delays and improve case management?Actions taken in FY 2014-2015 to reduce delays and improve case management.
(Hover on the chart for more information and click on the chart to see which courts chose that response.)
Actions taken in FY 2014-2015 to reduce delays and improve case management.
Additional actions taken by the courts to address this objective
13th JDC
The court upgraded computers and developed an online calendar. The court also worked with the sheriff to develop an online warrant issuing system.
14th JDC
A criminal commissioner was appointed to conduct felony arraignments, traffic court, misdemeanor court and misdemeanor trials. Use of the commissioner freed up three days a week for the Criminal II judge. The judge used those days to work on felony docket management, primarily through the use of pretrials/case management conferences. The court also maintained universal calendaring to encourage and monitor use of extra court dates.
15th JDC
The 15th JDC reported that some judges increased the number of opportunities for pre-trial conferences, to move cases and allow more trial time during regular docket week.
16th JDC
The 16th JDC continued to improve the docketing schedule and manual system of case processing and continued to conduct review hearings to better manage criminal cases. The court also maintained an allotment system for juvenile cases. There are two juvenile sections in each parish, one for Child in Need of Care (CINC) cases and one for Delinquency/Families in Need of Services cases. One judge in each parish is assigned all juvenile court dockets, an initiative that has resulted in greater continuity of adjudication, better judicial oversight, and improved proficiency. The court also continued to employ a Juvenile Docket Coordinator, who serves as a case manager for CINC cases throughout the district.

Division “E” maintained a process for tracking criminal cases through an automated case tracking system. A case management system is being developed for judges to track juvenile cases in each parish. The judges maintained a policy regarding the allotment of non-support appeals cases to ensure timely and uniform processing throughout the district, and continued DWI courts in Iberia and St. Mary Parishes for first and second offenders. The court scheduled additional criminal dates on the court calendars to accommodate the current caseload and reduce delays in the processing of criminal cases throughout the district.

The court maintained a family court program in Iberia, St. Martin, and St. Mary Parishes, where three full-time hearing officers conducted pretrial conferences in all family court matters. Hearing officers in all three parishes conducted intake hearings and conferences between involved parties and attorneys in domestic matters concerning divorce, child custody and visitation, child support, spousal support, use and occupancy of the home and of movables, community property, and petitions for protective orders, and made recommendations for the continued development and expansion of the program. The judges conducted periodic reviews of certain domestic abuse relations cases with the parties on an ongoing basis, especially in contested custody and visitation cases.

The court authorized and encouraged Court Appointed Special Advocates volunteers to attend 72-hour hearings in CINC cases to help facilitate the timely appointment of curators. The judges maintained a policy to serve protective orders in open court and have that service reflected in the court minutes. Judges continued to work cooperatively with sheriffs in all three parishes to develop a plan to provide for payment of fines by credit card and to develop a plan to implement electronic warrant procedures.

The court arranged for fathers in CINC cases to participate in the Best Dads Program. This program, designed to improve the participants’ parenting skills, consists of ten group sessions with fathers in comparable circumstances.

The court also continued quarterly benchmark conferences between the district judge presiding over CINC proceedings and each teen between the ages of 14 and 18. These are intensive conferences designed to be supportive of the teen, assuring that he or she receives appropriate assessments, planning, and support services. The court places particular emphasis on educational issues, ensuring that each teen has the tools and supports to be a successful student when moving from high school to post-secondary education. The court also places emphasis on the teen's current educational performance and on providing support, if necessary, for improved classroom performance. The court also considers the teen's desires and aspirations for the future once he or she leaves foster care.

The court participated in the Louisiana’s Child Welfare Programs Improvement Plan and the 16th Judicial District Transformation Zone. Through these programs, the court worked with local and state agencies to focus on parents early in CINC matters, giving families greater opportunities to participate in their case plan and to promote placement of children in homes outside of the foster care system.

Also, the St. Martin and St. Mary Parish Family Court Programs reduced the time between the filing of a family court case and the hearing officer conference by expediting family court cases with the Clerk of Courtclerk of court. The court consistently set the conference for 21 to 28 days after the suit was filed, subject to the availability of the attorneys.

In domestic cases, involving individuals from out-of-state, St. Mary Parish holds the hearing officer conference on the same date as their court date. This date is prior to the rule so that the out-of-state parties, in most cases, only have to travel to the Louisiana on one occasion. In addition, St. Mary Parish Family Court makes every effort to resolve the cases prior to trial and will allow an out-of-state party's appearance for the hearing officer conference, with approval from the judge, to be facilitated by Skype or telephone with the papers then being mailed to the out-of-state party for signature and return to the court. Both consent judgments and hearing officer recommendations are often handled in this manner in St. Mary Parish to eliminate the need for an out-of-state party to make a personal appearance and the associated costs. In all cases, the court strove to insure that a hearing officer conference was held within 21 days of the date of filing of the suit.
17th JDC
The 17th JDC maintained aiSmartBench judicial case processing technology.
18th JDC
The court's automated case allotment system continued to be managed by the clerk of court.
21st JDC
The 21st JDC signed a contract for a case management system for the family court judges.
22nd JDC
The court instituted systematic statistical review of closed felony cases. The court's family court divisions instituted data collection on performance benchmarks. Judges pre-tried cases, particularly those criminal matters involving the district attorney's office and the public defender, at all possible times during the life of a case.
24th JDC
The 24th JDC continued to utilize criminal commissioners to handle various duties including arraignments, setting bonds, and signing warrants, probable cause affidavits and stay-away orders. The criminal commissioners also heard motions for bond reduction and preliminary examinations, allowing the judges to concentrate more on their respective dockets.

Also, to assist in expediting domestic cases, the 24th JDC continued to utilize a domestic commissioner and four hearing officers in its Domestic Early Triage Program.
26th JDC
The 26th JDC planned for the roll-out of a case management system in early December 2015, which has the ability to measure court performance using CourTools 2: Clearance rates, CourTool 3: Time to Disposition, CourTools 4: Age of Active Pending Caseload, and CourTools 5: Trial Date Certainty. The performance measures were created by the National Center for State Courts. The judges of the 26th JDC will use this case management system to improve case flow.
29th JDC
The court contracted with mediators/facilitators to assist in contentious domestic cases.
32nd JDC
The court randomly allotted all cases of every type manually by the office of the clerk of court. The court used a video conference system to handle video arraignments and other criminal proceedings, to reduce the transportation of criminal defendants from the parish jail and thereby lessen security issues. The court also ordered mediation and used pretrial orders.
38th JDC
In legacy (oil contamination) cases, the court utilized pre-trial conferences, case management orders, and environmental management orders.
East Baton Rouge Juvenile Court
The court continued to hold Child in Need of Care (CINC) Facilitation Team Meetings to address issues with all parties involved in the CINC process.
ResponseResponse_Court
Additional actions taken by the courts to address this objective14 courts (13th JDC, 14th JDC, 15th JDC, 16th JDC, 17th JDC, 18th JDC, 21st JDC, 22nd JDC, 24th JDC, 26th JDC, 29th JDC, 32nd JDC, 38th JDC, East Baton Rouge Juvenile Court)
Continued to address this objective through the actions indicated below, or implemented the following new actions in FY 2014-2015 to address this objective as indicated below:47 courts (1st JDC, 2nd JDC, 3rd JDC, 4th JDC, 5th JDC, 6th JDC, 7th JDC, 8th JDC, 9th JDC, 10th JDC, 11th JDC, 12th JDC, 13th JDC, 14th JDC, 15th JDC, 16th JDC, 17th JDC, 18th JDC, 19th JDC, 20th JDC, 21st JDC, 22nd JDC, 23rd JDC, 24th JDC, 25th JDC, 26th JDC, 28th JDC, 29th JDC, 30th JDC, 31st JDC, 32nd JDC, 33rd JDC, 34th JDC, 35th JDC, 36th JDC, 37th JDC, 38th JDC, 39th JDC, 40th JDC, 42nd JDC, Caddo Parish Juvenile Court, East Baton Rouge Family Court, East Baton Rouge Juvenile Court, Jefferson Parish Juvenile Court, Orleans Parish Civil District Court, Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, Orleans Parish Juvenile Court)
Did not address in FY 2014-20151 court (27th JDC)
Employed case managers to expedite court processes4 courts (4th JDC, 16th JDC, 42nd JDC, Jefferson Parish Juvenile Court)
Encouraged alternative dispute resolutions28 courts (1st JDC, 2nd JDC, 3rd JDC, 4th JDC, 5th JDC, 6th JDC, 9th JDC, 10th JDC, 12th JDC, 16th JDC, 17th JDC, 18th JDC, 19th JDC, 21st JDC, 24th JDC, 25th JDC, 26th JDC, 29th JDC, 30th JDC, 32nd JDC, 36th JDC, 38th JDC, 39th JDC, 40th JDC, 42nd JDC, East Baton Rouge Family Court, Jefferson Parish Juvenile Court, Orleans Parish Civil District Court)
Implemented or maintained the use of pre-trial conferences40 courts (1st JDC, 2nd JDC, 3rd JDC, 4th JDC, 5th JDC, 6th JDC, 7th JDC, 9th JDC, 10th JDC, 11th JDC, 12th JDC, 13th JDC, 14th JDC, 15th JDC, 16th JDC, 17th JDC, 18th JDC, 20th JDC, 22nd JDC, 23rd JDC, 24th JDC, 25th JDC, 26th JDC, 28th JDC, 29th JDC, 30th JDC, 31st JDC, 32nd JDC, 33rd JDC, 34th JDC, 35th JDC, 36th JDC, 37th JDC, 38th JDC, 40th JDC, 42nd JDC, East Baton Rouge Family Court, Jefferson Parish Juvenile Court, Orleans Parish Civil District Court, Orleans Parish Criminal District Court)
Implemented or maintained time standards for case processing16 courts (3rd JDC, 9th JDC, 11th JDC, 16th JDC, 22nd JDC, 28th JDC, 32nd JDC, 34th JDC, 38th JDC, 42nd JDC, Caddo Parish Juvenile Court, East Baton Rouge Family Court, East Baton Rouge Juvenile Court, Jefferson Parish Juvenile Court, Orleans Parish Civil District Court, Orleans Parish Criminal District Court)
Improved communication with police, sheriff's and marshal's offices29 courts (1st JDC, 2nd JDC, 3rd JDC, 4th JDC, 6th JDC, 7th JDC, 9th JDC, 10th JDC, 11th JDC, 13th JDC, 14th JDC, 15th JDC, 17th JDC, 21st JDC, 24th JDC, 25th JDC, 26th JDC, 28th JDC, 29th JDC, 31st JDC, 32nd JDC, 34th JDC, 36th JDC, 42nd JDC, Caddo Parish Juvenile Court, East Baton Rouge Juvenile Court, Jefferson Parish Juvenile Court, Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, Orleans Parish Juvenile Court)
Improved docketing and scheduling32 courts (2nd JDC, 3rd JDC, 4th JDC, 6th JDC, 7th JDC, 8th JDC, 9th JDC, 10th JDC, 11th JDC, 12th JDC, 13th JDC, 16th JDC, 17th JDC, 18th JDC, 23rd JDC, 24th JDC, 25th JDC, 26th JDC, 28th JDC, 29th JDC, 33rd JDC, 34th JDC, 35th JDC, 36th JDC, 40th JDC, 42nd JDC, Caddo Parish Juvenile Court, East Baton Rouge Family Court, East Baton Rouge Juvenile Court, Jefferson Parish Juvenile Court, Orleans Parish Civil District Court, Orleans Parish Criminal District Court)
Improved the manual system of case processing12 courts (6th JDC, 10th JDC, 11th JDC, 13th JDC, 16th JDC, 17th JDC, 18th JDC, 31st JDC, 33rd JDC, 42nd JDC, Orleans Parish Civil District Court, Orleans Parish Criminal District Court)
Installed or maintained an automated case allotment system23 courts (1st JDC, 9th JDC, 12th JDC, 14th JDC, 18th JDC, 22nd JDC, 24th JDC, 25th JDC, 26th JDC, 29th JDC, 30th JDC, 33rd JDC, 34th JDC, 36th JDC, 40th JDC, 42nd JDC, Caddo Parish Juvenile Court, East Baton Rouge Family Court, East Baton Rouge Juvenile Court, Jefferson Parish Juvenile Court, Orleans Parish Civil District Court, Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, Orleans Parish Juvenile Court)
Installed or maintained an automated case management system17 courts (1st JDC, 9th JDC, 16th JDC, 17th JDC, 19th JDC, 24th JDC, 25th JDC, 26th JDC, 34th JDC, 36th JDC, 42nd JDC, Caddo Parish Juvenile Court, East Baton Rouge Family Court, East Baton Rouge Juvenile Court, Jefferson Parish Juvenile Court, Orleans Parish Civil District Court, Orleans Parish Juvenile Court)
Planned the development of an automated case management system6 courts (14th JDC, 19th JDC, 26th JDC, Caddo Parish Juvenile Court, East Baton Rouge Family Court, Orleans Parish Criminal District Court)
Took steps to reduce cases under advisement23 courts (2nd JDC, 3rd JDC, 6th JDC, 7th JDC, 9th JDC, 10th JDC, 13th JDC, 14th JDC, 18th JDC, 25th JDC, 26th JDC, 28th JDC, 29th JDC, 30th JDC, 31st JDC, 34th JDC, 35th JDC, 36th JDC, 38th JDC, 42nd JDC, East Baton Rouge Family Court, Orleans Parish Civil District Court, Orleans Parish Criminal District Court)
Used docket status reports9 courts (3rd JDC, 10th JDC, 14th JDC, 15th JDC, 34th JDC, 36th JDC, 42nd JDC, East Baton Rouge Juvenile Court, Orleans Parish Criminal District Court)

© 2024 - Louisiana Supreme Court, 400 Royal St., New Orleans, LA 70130