PLEASE NOTE: This blog is a bigotry free zone open to all persons, regardless of age, race, religion, color, national origin, sex, political affiliations, marital status, physical or mental disability, age, or sexual orientation. Further, this blog is open to the broad variety of opinions out there and will not delete any comments based upon point of view. However, comments will be deleted if they are worded in an abusive manner and show disrespect for the intellectual process.

Friday, October 26, 2012

NEW BARRIERS TO ACCESSING JUSTICE, SELF REPS SEE CUTBACKS IN LAW LIBRARIES!

On October 19, 2012, the Access to Justice Commission published its Annual Report consisting of 38 pages.  In its report, the Access to Justice Commission expressed particular concern regarding self represented parties and the abilility self represented parties had to obtain information necessary to pursuing their cases in Court. 
 
Recent statistics have indicated that in the State of Connecticut, 87% of parties in Family Court are self represented.  This means that there are a great many self represented parties who are in desperate need of information not only in regard to which forms to use, but also in regard to Practice Book rules and case law. 
 
It is surprising then, that in the past year, an April 9, 2012 article by Lauren Sievert of the "Middletown Press" reports that "law libraries in Connecticut have suffered major cutbaks in the last three years."  As Ms. Sievert reports about it, the situation is grim.  Two law libraries have closed since 2009.  Also, according to Judge Barbara Quinn, Chief Administrative Officer of the Judicial Branch, since 2009, eight librarians have been let go and two are on leave of absense. 
 
In addition, according to Ms. Sievert, Judge Quinn states that "the budget [for the library] spent in 2009 was $2.485 million, and the estimated budget expenditure for 2012 is $1.1 million."  This is a drastic reduction in the operating budget of the legal libraries in this State. 
 
According to Sievert, "Law Librarians help the public when they are in need of assistance in finding the materials and laws regarding their cases.  The librarians, who must have Master's Degrees in library science, can help the public print material regarding cases, draft motions and point them in the right direction to move along their cases." 
 
Of course, many attorneys have online resources, but that is not always true of self represented parties. 
 
In addition, self represented parties often need the assistance of librarians simply to define the kinds of good questions they need to ask and then to pursue the answers in their research.  This is why State Law Libraries are so valuable.  One of the most important services that the Law Libraries provide are the Pathfinders which provide vital information in regard to key issues in the law that self represented parties are likely to face.  Retired Middletown Librarian, Lawrence Cheeseman, played a major role in developing these Pathfinders. 
 
It is particularly troubling that the State has started to cut back the hours of these Law Libraries.  For example, the Hartford Law Library, probably one of the most used in the State, is closed on Thursdays and Fridays, and the Waterbury Library is closed on Wednesday.  When the Libraries start to reduce their hours, we as citizens should start to be very concerned. 
 
The mission of the Judicial Branch is to be more open and accessible to litigants; however, that is a hard goal to achieve when you are restricting access to your law libraries. 
 
As Law Libraries are faced with major cutbacks and closures, it is ironic that a recent report issued this month by Connecticut Chief Justice Chase T. Rogers proposes that most state judges receive pay raises of $45,000 over the next four years.  This would raise judicial pay in Superior Court from $147,000 per year to about $192,000 over four years, and it would then raise the pay of Supreme Court justices from $163,000 to $212,000.
 
According to David Collins of the Associated Press who initially reported on this pay raise proposal on October 18, 2012, the last pay raise for judges in the State of Connecticut was in 2007 and left them with an annual salary of $147,000.  He goes further to state, "that's the 14th highest salary level in the country for general trial court judges, but 45th in the nation when the state's high cost of living is factored in, according to the National Center for State Courts." 
 
He goes further to state that, "The average trial court judge's salary nationwide is about $137,000."  Thus, Connecticut's Salary is a little above the median.  
 
This pay raise should cost approximately $3.8 million.  Personally, I have trouble cutting the budget for the State's Law Libraries drastically by approximately $1.3 million in order to make way for pay raises for judges.  After all, don't Law Libraries benefit us a whole lot more than additional judges?  Isn't the use of law libraries on the level of teaching a man to farm rather than just giving him a handout?  Don't we save a lot more money teaching litigants to do things for themselves through Law Libraries rather than hiring more clerks and other personnel to guide them through the process so they don't clog up the court because of their lack of knowledge?

Some citizens have said that we should raise Judges' salaries higher if we want to make sure we retain the services of the highest quality of talented judges.  This is similar to the thinking we have gone along with before in the State of Connecticut, that having well paid teachers will lead to the highest quality of teachers.  Thus, salaries in the State of Connecticut for teachers are among the highest in the country.  Certainly, the proposed salary for judges of $192,000 would be well above the highest salary for judges in the nation, propelling us to first place.

However, as one commentator has stated, "There is no need for this...Keep in mind that these judges were the "talented judges" who in a 4 - 3 ruling on October 2, 2012, overturned the sexual assault conviction of a man who raped a disabled woman with severe cerebral palsy, who has a functional intellectual I.Q. of a 3 year old, and who cannot verbally communicate because she didn't leave evidence of "biting, kicking, scratching, screeching, groaning or gesturing" to indicate her lack of agreement with the act.

So what is your choice in regard to this issue?  More funding for libraries, or more funding for Judges' salaries?  Let me know your opinions.


For a look at the original article about Law Libraries, see link below:
http://www.middletownpress.com/articles/2012/04/09/news/doc4f822dededc18179387483.prt

For a directory of all the Legal Libraries, see link below:
http://www.jud.ct.gov/lawlib/staff.htm

For the article in regard to Judges' salaries, see link below:
http://www1.salary.com/Judge-Magistrate-Salary.html

No comments:

Post a Comment