The U.S. civil justice system was forced to change in 2020 due to the coronavirus pandemic. Panelists in this virtual conference addressed the effects of COVID-19 on the civil justice system and how lessons learned can be applied going forward.
Online dispute resolution provides a forum for the resolution of court matters that was especially important during the COVID-19 pandemic. A panel of experts identified strategies to improve access to justice using these platforms.
This brief highlights the challenges that the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic posed for the court system, how courts adapted to those challenges, and a discussion of which adaptations might hold promise after the pandemic.
Incarcerated populations, corrections staff, court personnel, and law enforcement were hit hard by COVID-19. At the same time, national protests after the killing of George Floyd and other Black Americans increased pressure for criminal justice reform. Insights from this time could help the justice system prepare for future challenges.
What are the common technology challenges facing the three central sections of the criminal justice system—law enforcement, the courts, and corrections agencies? What innovative solutions could be implemented to address these challenges?
In 2018, the Priority Criminal Justice Needs Initiative convened a workshop to explore the use of telepresence technology in the courtroom. Participants expressed the need for research-driven utilization to ensure that its full potential is realized.
A preliminary assessment of the impact of the financial crisis on the civil justice system finds that litigation demands on some parts of the system have increased, that funding for state courts may be trending downward, and that there have been disruptions in the legal services economy, in the provision of legal aid, and in the operation and staffing of courts.
In July 2009, the UCLA-RAND Center for Law and Public Policy convened a conference to assess the regulatory implications, effect on dispute resolution, and trends in the development of third-party litigation funding.
The Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts asked the RAND Institute for Civil Justice to evaluate the implementation of the Civil Justice Reform Act in ten pilot districts.
To evaluate the effects of the Civil Justice Reform Act (CJRA) of 1990, the RAND Institute for Civil Justice was asked to look at implementation of certain case management policies in ten pilot districts.
The Advisory Committee on Civil Rules of the Judicial Conference of the United States asked RAND to conduct further analyses of the CJRA evaluation data to see if additional light could be shed on discovery management.
The report traces the stages in the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 (CJRA) implementation: the recommendations of the advisory groups, the plans adopted by the districts, and the plans actually implemented.
The Civil Justice Reform Act (CJRA) of 1990 is rooted in more than a decade of concern that cases in federal courts take too long and cost litigants too much. As a consequence, proponents of reform argue, some individuals are denied access to justice.