At Georgia Tech’s school of architecture, they are investigating the physical design of the courthouse experience.
Category: Ideabook
I am on a design team, working on how to redesign the small claims mediation & family mediation (that now would occur offline, in a court house, in a room with a mediator and the parties) into an online experience.
My team interviewed a mediator who has expertise in these offline mediations — these are my notes & insights.
Green: possible failpoints, where a mediation could go wrong online.
Yellow: best practices she recommends.
Red Pink: insights into how mediations work & what the stakeholders want.
Bright Pink: miscellaneous comments.
Stay tuned — we are moving towards mocking up basic flows and interfaces for an online mediation experience…
Canada — in particular British Columbia — has been the leading light in using online tools for providing dispute resolution to citizens. They have found most success in small property & zoning disputes, and also with consumer protection cases.
They have done some empirical research and found that people in family law disputes actually DO want online tools in their disputes. Particular use has been found in divorce settlements, dividing up joint property.
The court there is also considering building a full scale online tribunal.
B.C. plans to create the first-ever tribunal in Canada that offers a full array of online tools to allow British Columbians to solve common strata and small civil claims outside of courts, Minister of Justice and Attorney General Shirley Bond announced today.
If passed, the Civil Resolution Tribunal Act will create an independent tribunal offering 24/7 online dispute resolution tools to families and small business owners as a speedy and cost-effective alternative to going to court. The tribunal would address disputes by providing parties with information that may prevent disputes from growing and resolve disputes by consent or, where necessary, by an independent tribunal hearing. Resolving a dispute through the tribunal is expected to take about 60 days, compared to 12 to 18 months for small claims court.
Giving families alternatives to seeking solutions in court is among the B.C. government’s justice reform initiatives to achieve efficiencies and deal with growing resource pressures. The February 2012 Green Paper, Modernizing British Columbia’s Justice System, identified tribunals as a simple and less expensive solution to easing delays in the court system.
- Automated Call Back Systems from legal services to people who have reached out
- SMS reminders from courts to litigants about what expectations are
- Using data for legal services to better track their work & targets
- Virtual office kits to provide legal services on the go, or outside of legal offices
- An app that gives checklists to lawyers to ensure they’re catching all the issues
“Don’t Forget Your Court Date”
How text messages and other technology can give legal support to the poor.
It has been three years since the Great Recession ended, but the nation’s courthouses are still swamped with eviction cases, foreclosures, and debt collection suits. If overdue bills and late rent were crimes, all low-income tenants and debtors could get a public defender for free. Because those cases are civil suits, though, the state doesn’t provide an attorney. Which means that in civil court, most people don’t have a lawyer in their corner—even though their homes and financial stability are on the line.
What many do have in their back pockets, however, is a smartphone. And soon, they might be able to find some legal help there, too.
Like everyone else, lawyers for the poor are trying to do more with less, as government grants and private funding have dried up. Increasingly, that means turning to tech, using new tools to deliver information to clients, support volunteer lawyers, and improve their own systems. They’re using text messaging, automated call-backs, Web chats, and computer-assisted mapping.
A crush of new clients is pushing the growing reliance on technology, as the old systems just can’t keep up. For years, people seeking help have called their local legal services offices, only to wait on hold for 20 minutes or more. If someone has a pay-by-the-minute cellphone, as many low-income people do, that gets expensive fast. Many callers just give up, says Elizabeth Frisch, the co-executive director of Legal Aid of Southeastern Pennsylvania. So Frisch and her team are piloting an automated call-back system, using voice over IP, to reduce hold time and save those precious minutes.
Text messages can also improve efficiency. If courts sent SMS reminders to litigants, that would help move along cases that get postponed over and over when one party doesn’t show up, says Glenn Rawdon. Rawdon runs the technology grants program at the Legal Services Corp., the federal program that funds legal aid groups. A text could also help people remember to bring documents to meetings with their overworked lawyers. “It’s very time-consuming if they come to the appointment and say, ‘Oh yeah, I forgot to bring the papers,’ ” Rawdon says. And SMS can be used to deliver basic legal information, like what to look for when signing a lease, or the laws surrounding a wage claim. Legal aid groups in Georgia, New York, Washington, Illinois, and Pennsylvania are all piloting text-based campaigns this year.
For simple questions, technology can help deliver information to clients. For more complicated problems, only a lawyer will do. Unfortunately, there aren’t enough lawyers to go around. That’s particularly true outside of cities.
For example, 70 percent of Georgia’s lawyers are in the Atlanta metro area, although just under 30 percent of the state’s population lives there, according to the State Bar of Georgia. Six counties have no lawyers at all.
“It’s really expensive to deliver legal services in a rural area. Lawyers have to travel,” says Michael Monahan of Georgia Legal Services. Some lawyers at his organization cover six or seven counties, he says, working in the field three or four days a week.
So five years ago, Georgia Legal Services created virtual office kits, with laptops, portable printers, and scanners. They also got an assist from Sprint, which provided free air cards for mobile Internet access and an “extremely low data rate” for unlimited usage.
In Ohio, which also has big rural areas and a shortage of lawyers to serve them, Web chat can help volunteers reach more clients.
The system “allows us to address an imbalance between where the attorneys are and where our clients are,” says Kevin Mulder, executive director of Legal Aid of Western Ohio.
But logistics aren’t the only hurdle for volunteers. They can be “a little uncomfortable taking cases that are outside their practice area,” says David Lund, who runs the Legal Aid Service of Northeastern Minnesota.
If you’re used to dealing with real estate contracts, for instance, a Medicaid case can be intimidating. So he’s developing a set of checklists for specific issues, optimized for tablets, that lawyers can use when they’re volunteering.
They’ll use it at the start of a case, as they’re laying out a client’s options, and at potential settlements, to make sure that they haven’t missed anything crucial. In eviction cases, for example, a landlord can get a judgment of possession. This allows the tenant to leave without paying back rent, but it’s still a judgment against him, which means it can jeopardize eligibility for future subsidized housing, like Section 8. An experienced landlord-tenant lawyer would know that. An occasional volunteer would not. Which is where the checklist comes in.
Some things are best left to full-time legal aid lawyers. But since there are so few, groups are using data analysis and mapping to better focus their scarce resources. Prairie State Legal Services in Rockford, Ill., is using its “incredible mass of data” to develop a mapping project, plotting addresses and legal needs. Director Michael O’Connor says this will help them answer questions like, “Are there clusters in certain communities where lots of people are facing issues with access to public benefits, or substandard housing?” Armed with that information, his staff can do targeted outreach campaigns or ramp up for litigation.
No one thinks technology is a cure-all. Even the best app or website can’t stand next to you in front of a judge, responding to the opposing counsel.
And despite these promising tools, unmet need is enormous. Many clients want more support than they can get from an app or a chat, but limited funds make that unlikely. “For a large percentage of those folks, [help via technology] will be it. That will be the most that we will be able to offer,” says Deb Jennings, who manages a phone helpline at Advocates for Basic Legal Equality in Toledo, Ohio. And the use of new tech tools is in the early stages—many projects are somewhere between concept and beta.
The tools that are in use show great promise. Groups across the country have developed self-help websites, and they’ve been hugely popular. In 2012 so far, more than 3 million people downloaded resources from LawHelp.org, a nonprofit site that offers legal information and legal aid referrals. Through an affiliated site, people can answer simple questions and produce documents ready to file in court. More than 300,000 people have created documents this year, for things like wills, leases, and custody agreements.
In an ideal world, everyone who needs one would have a lawyer. But few people know better than lawyers for the poor just how far from ideal this world is.
Relying on technology “is a bit waving the white flag and saying we acknowledge we’re not going to help everybody, so here’s a second best solution,” O’Connor says. “And it is second best, but it is at least providing help to some people who otherwise wouldn’t get anything.”
This article arises from Future Tense, a collaboration among Arizona State University, the New America Foundation, and Slate. Future Tense explores the ways emerging technologies affect society, policy, and culture. To read more, visit the Future Tense blog and the Future Tense home page. You can also follow us on Twitter.
Here is the presentation from today’s Stanford Law lunch, with law professor Josh Blackman discussing his startup to rival Pacer in distributing case information in a more usable way, with better ways to see relations between firms, judges, cases, companies, etc.
He also mentioned the possibility of developing a Siri, Attorney at Law, in which a non-lawyer could ask a simple question to their mobile phone: “My landlord won’t fix my heat, what should I do”. The phone would then suggest possible paths of action the non-lawyer could take: call tenant rights’ group; file a pro se suit against the landlord; find a lawyer; or compose a legal document complaining of the problem.
Blackman made the argument that these kinds of future legal tech could be an important means of access to justice — people could get solutions to their legal problems without the hassle and wait of going to a legal services office and waiting for help.
A presentation by Colin Rule, of Online Dispute Resolution fame, on a concept design for a mobile traditional justice platform. The m-Jirga program would mimic an elders council meeting in a town square or mosque, that would hear disputants’ sides of a conflict, then vote and issue a ruling on who will prevail.
The m-Jirga was proposed for a rural Afghan audience, but wasn’t ultimately implemented. As a concept design, it is a useful starting point. How might we design systems of justice — that lets a person bring a dispute with another, get a chance to advocate her position, and receive an enforceable ruling — that could be accessed on dumb mobile phones or basic smart phones?
And, how might we let people who are disadvantaged in traditional justice systems (likely: young women, minorities, very poor) present their position in semi-anonymous way, so that their typical disadvantage is erased?
For the excellent Legal Tech class I’m taking at Stanford Law School on the future of legal technology, I am proposing to build a WebMD for law.
My central question is ‘how might we build tech that could help a lay person diagnose their own legal problems’? I am asking it because most legal technology currently is being built for a few audience segments:
1) Big Law lawyers who want to cut costs and make their practice more efficient
2) Law students to do research and construct arguments better
3) Fairly well-educated consumers who want to accomplish discrete tasks — making a will, incorporating a business, getting a marriage or divorce agreement, electronically signing a contract
I am interested in getting legal services & counsel to people not in these three categories: those people who lack the legal grounding to know what their legal problems are, and how they can go about fixing them.
The target audience for ‘a WebMD for law’ would be people with a legal itch — they have a problem in their life that is worrying them, and they think it might be tied up with something to do with the law. Their dentist botched a root canal. Their landlord is asking for more money. Their employment interviewers are asking about immigration status. A policeman confiscated their camera at a protest.
There are many services currently online for people to look up statutes, cases, commentaries, and other sources of law. See Legal Information Institute, Google Scholar, PlainSite, Ravel Law, Wikipedia — and if you have money in your pocket, WestLaw and Lexis. But these legal tech products are not useful to a person unless she first knows what she is looking for.
There is a gaping need for a technology that can bridge the lay person from ‘I have a problem’ to ‘What is the law to help me with my problem’. This technology would provide the lay person with the understanding: ‘This is my problem in legal terms. These are the specific legal matters that are at issue’. It would do what first year law students spend all their free time doing: issue-spot.
I am interested in this for a wide variety of ‘lay people’. It would be best to support those who are most removed from the legal system, people who don’t have the money, time, proximity, or knowledge to access legal counsel & services. But it would also have enormous benefit to the many people who are well-educated, living relatively well, but when it comes to the law — feel totally out of their depth, don’t know a tort from a criminal action, and can’t navigate the jargon of the legal system.
These slides are from a presentation, “Is There a WebMD Effect: open access to law, the public, and the legal profession” up on SlideShare by a lawyer, T. Bruce, who was also thinking about the possibility of a WebMD for law. The presentation highlights that there is a need to serve this ‘latent legal market’ — while also warning that giving greater access to legal diagnosis tools may induce ‘cyberchondria’ in the general public.
People could find more legal issues in their lives than they actually have (or than actually matter), and this could have negative effects — overtaxing the legal system with more frivolous lawsuits, inducing people to seek costly legal help when in fact they do not need it, giving false confidence to people that they can represent themselves with their new legal knowledge.
This 15th century concern — that ‘reading the law without right understanding’ might lead to people harming themselves with legal knowledge — cannot be ignored. But it does not outweigh the need for a technology that can bridge people’s legal itchiness with a capacity to use the many legal resources now available online.
Sri Lankan tech researcher & TED fellow Sanjana Hattotuwa has laid out some of the basic capabilities that mobile phones in the field can be used in dispute resolution and rule of law.
Data gathering
- Plotting the GIS coordinates of the disputed territory, including details of the location, resources and details of adjacent territory
- Details of disputants, including audio and video testimonies, multimedia footage and documentation of case details
- The in-field mediator or contact person can make his or her own notes and add them to the case file – through text, multiple answer questions via SMS, audio notes or video recordings
- Rapid entry of key case details, which the mediator can then go back and expand
Real time ODR
- System generated messages can be handed out to disputants to follow up with a voice message system that gives them the status of the case in the vernacular
- Mediators can be informed of similar cases in real time using intelligent comparisons of data and disputes
- GIS boundaries of land can be plotted and sent to regional centres which can print out the maps and hand them over to the disputants to visually aid the process of mediation
- Case details can be semantically linked to provide mediators with expert systems that are able to generate options to help with decision making
- F2F synchronous and asynchronous mediation using mobile video conferring technologies
Offline ODR
- Indexed case histories can feed into knowledge repositories that can be accessed offline, in print or as audio files to help train and build mediation capacities of ADR mediators
- Anecdotal input by mediators can be indexed to create expert system that examine semantic linkages within and between such input to influence options generation – for instance, the family history of a particular disputant, the structural underpinnings to a land dispute which may be linked to loss of face and other observations
- Ability to access thematic or issue based case studies over a given period of time, or examine a particular case against possible options and the probability for resolution based on historical data, or access to case histories in a particular context, region or identity group (ethnic, religious or gender).
- A central repository of information on past and on-going ADR and ODR processes, grouped by issue, region, ethnicity, mode of settlement, mediator etc
Settlement process
- Disputants get vernacular SMS notification of settlement. Those who cannot read also get a voice mail with relevant details. Simple disputes can be resolved on the spot with expert systems that help in options generation for the dispute.
- Video conferencing via mobile phones can aid where disputants are far removed from ADR centres. Mediated voice conferences can aid in settlement processes along with asynchronous video, wherein parties get to see and hear each other’s viewpoints.
- Mobile systems can complement and strengthen traditional face-to-face (F2F) meetings but reducing the need for physical meetings, reserving F2F meetings for the most intractable disputes, facilitating virtual F2F meetings between active disputants and those that have successfully resolved similar disputes in the past in the same region or on the same issue, enable mediators themselves to interact with each other to discuss, transfer knowledge and share information between each other.