Coffin, Frank M.

English

University of Maine

Maine Policy ReviewVolume 11 | Issue 12002Court Re-form: The Maine WayFrank M. CoffinFirst Circuit Court of AppealsFollow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mprPart of the Courts CommonsThis Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine.Recommended CitationCoffin, Frank M. . "Court Re-form: The Maine Way." Maine Policy Review 11.1 (2002) : 28 -30,https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mpr/vol11/iss1/6.28 ·  MAINE POLICY REVIEW  ·  Spring 2002 View current & previous issues of MPR at: www.umaine.edu/mcsc/mpr.htmSYMPOSIUM ON JUDICAL REFORMCourt Re-form: The Maine WayBy Frank M. CoffinThis issue of Maine Policy Reviewfeatures four articles reviewing recentdevelopments in Maine court reform byactive participants. It is my theme thatsomething is happening in our currentefforts to improve the justice system byway of changes in the roles of judges,lawyers, and litigants that reflects Mainecivic culture at its best—a culture sparkedby concern for justice for all, fueled byself-reliance, collaboration and initiative,led by imagination, and sustained by thepersistent selfless commitment of many. Reform in the PastCourt reform in Maine through the first half of the last century brings to mind the effort and time required tocause a great ocean liner to alter course.An example, in which I played the part of a rowboat trying to push, was the tortuous path leading to the abandon-ment of common law pleading and theadoption of new rules of procedure. In 1949, though still a law clerk to newUnited States District Judge John D.Clifford, Jr., I attended the mid-wintermeeting of the Bar Association and made a motion to appoint a committee to look into the matter. A committee of five was dulyappointed, including me and four vener-able leaders of the profession. We nevermet. The chair asked for written views.The prevailing sentiment was voiced byone of my elders as such: “It has taken me about thirty-five years to becomeacquainted with our state rules, and I fearthat it would take me another thirty-fiveyears to become familiar with the federalrules.” The committee report boldly recommended a “thorough-going anddeliberate investigation” and disbanded. Change finally happened a decadelater, after a plea for action by JusticeSullivan and leadership from respectedPortland lawyer Israel Bernstein. The lesson to be drawn from this wasthat for change to take place, it not onlyhad to proceed with the greatest delibera-tion, but had to be led by the acknowl-edged leaders of the profession. Andalthough in the ensuing decades the paceof change picked up, the reforms weremainly in substantive law and court proce-dures subjects that mattered a great deal to lawyers and judges. But, by and large,they did not penetrate the consciousnessof the public, including litigants.Current Reform EffortsAs will soon be obvious to the readerof these papers, court reform at thepresent differs dramatically from that in earlier eras, both in content and in style of effort. There are three major targetareas on today’s reform screen: thereshaping of courts to deal with newlyascendant problems; the devising ofprocedures to fit current needs; and thecreation of new modes of widening accessto courts. The first field is the subject ofJustice Jon Levy’s paper about drug courtand of Justice David Kennedy’s andDirector Wendy Rau’s paper concerningthe Family Division of the Maine DistrictCourt. The second is the domain ofJustice Nancy Mills, who discusses theprocedural innovations of the SingleJustice Assignment Project and its alliedsettlement conference. The third terrain, a broad one, is summarized by CalienLewis in her review of heroic volunteerefforts in the last decade. The Reshaping of CourtsThe juvenile and adult drug courtsand the Family Division both break awayfrom traditional court practices. Theyshare a more informal relationshipbetween litigants and the court, a morehands-on and continuing role for theS Y M P O S I U MView current & previous issues of MPR at: www.umaine.edu/mcsc/mpr.htm Spring 2002 ·  MAINE POLICY REVIEW  ·  29SYMPOSIUM ON JUDICAL REFORMjudge, and close collaboration with non-judicial resource personnel. Each focuseson a different stage of court involvement,as befits the nature of the proceeding. Drug court comes into play after anoffender is sentenced. The judge, aided bya community resource team (case worker,probation officer, treatment provider, pros-ecutor, etc.), continues to play a leadershiprole through regularly scheduled sessionsto review the offender’s progress towardrehabilitation and to invoke accountabilitythrough rewards and sanctions. Family Division, on the other hand,seeks early control of the progress of acase to maximize the chances of positiveresults. It features a case managementsystem in which a case managementofficer holds a prompt hearing in a newfamily law action involving children, withthe objectives of identifying issues, stabi-lizing family relations, meeting the needsof children, and setting the stage formediation and parenting education. We can predict further expansion ofthis expanded role concept for courts andjudges. A drug court approach underlies anew pilot program in two court locationsdealing with domestic violence. TheMuskie Fellowship for Legal Services has recently published “A Voice for Low-Income Children,” containing a probinganalysis of the need for the funding,training, and utilization of guardians adlitem in not only child protection casesbut in divorce and parental rights cases.And Chief Justice Saufley, in her first“State of the Judiciary” report, announceda new educational effort directed at attor-neys representing parents in child protec-tive proceedings. Three courthousesalready have the equipment to enable ajudge to hold a video hearing on an initialpetition for protection in a domestic violence case.“New Age” ProceduresAccompanying the above describedreshaping of courts is, as the reader mayhave noticed, a different kind of in-courtproceeding. However, impacting on thevast traffic of traditional cases, is anotherprocedural reform that is far more signifi-cant than its simple label heralds. Indeed,Single Justice Assignment not onlycentralizes the management of a case in the hands of one judge, with all theadvantages Justice Mills identifies, but italso sets the stage for increased resort to“settlement justices” to preside at confer-ences exploring settlement. Chief JusticeSaufley also referred in her report to anew program mandating recourse to alternative dispute resolution prior to trial. All of these measures strive forsimplicity, manageability, and full explo-ration of possibilities for resolution ofcontroversies without the delay andexpense of full-blown litigation.Access to JusticeThe magnitude of current efforts toimprove our justice system is demon-strated by Calien Lewis’ summary of the support of access to courts, first declining,then ascending, since the Muskie Reporton legal needs in 1990. The definingfeature of these efforts has been the overwhelming and unstinting contributionof a wide variety of participants. First comes the court itself. FormerChief Justice Wathen and now Chief JusticeSaufley provide a deep personal as well asan institutional commitment. Judges at everylevel have done important work, bothwithin the court structure and in the keycoordinating mechanism, the Justice ActionGroup (JAG). My own five-year stint aschair, with U.S. Circuit Judge Kermit Lipezsucceeding me, underscores a unique facetof our Maine enterprise, the united effortsof the judiciary, state and federal. Next come the providers, their offi-cers, boards, employees, and volunteers.The original quartet, Pine Tree LegalAssistance, Legal Services for the Elderly,the Cumberland Legal Aid Clinic, and the Volunteer Lawyers Project, have beenjoined by the Equal Justice Project andEqual Justice Partners. Newcomers on the scene are the Immigration LegalAdvocacy Project, and the Maine CivilLiberties Union’s prison project. Despiteslashed federal funding and the lack ofstate appropriations, the providers haveIt is my theme thatsomething ishappening in ourcurrent efforts toimprove the justicesystem by way ofchanges in theroles of judges,lawyers, and liti-gants that reflectsMaine civic cultureat its best…S Y M P O S I U M30 ·  MAINE POLICY REVIEW  ·  Spring 2002 View current & previous issues of MPR at: www.umaine.edu/mcsc/mpr.htmSYMPOSIUM ON JUDICAL REFORMbeen enabled to survive through legisla-tive permission to use increased civil filing fee funds and through generousaction by Maine bankers in making avail-able a higher percentage of interest onlawyers’ trust accounts. Another notableaction was that of the Levine FamilyFoundation, whose grant made possible,along with help from the Maine BarFoundation, the hiring of an executivecoordinator for the JAG. Lawyers themselves have been part of the general reform movement throughtheir long-standing and impressive partici-pation in the Volunteer Lawyers Project,the groundbreaking creation by twelvelarge Portland firms of the two Coffin fellowships in family law and, finally, therule of court allowing lawyers to committhemselves to limited legal services, an“unbundling” that promises to signifi-cantly expand affordable legal services. Litigants now have increased supportin their efforts to represent themselves.Court forms have been simplified. A moveis under way to supply courthouses withcomputers to assist litigants. Pine TreeLegal Assistance and Legal Services forthe Elderly have developed invaluable self-help materials. Non-lawyers have also joined inimportant undertakings. The LegalSecretaries’ Associations in Waterville andBangor contribute time each week toassist individuals at court in such mattersas filling out forms. The Association of American University Women havemanaged a neutral and safe environmentfor the exchange of children in custodymatters issuing from the West BathDistrict Court. And the statewide organi-zation of Court Appointed SpecialAdvocates has performed a heroic servicein supplying sorely needed help in childprotection cases.The Common ThemeThe theme underlying all of theseefforts has not been to abolish either doctrines of substantive law or establishedrules of procedure. It is rather to add totraditional court practices a different wayfor courts and judges to operate in orderto deal most effectively with particularkinds of problems. That is why I havegiven the word “re-form” to this introduc-tory paper; we are in the process ofchanging part of the roles, missions, andprocedures of not only courts and judges,but also lawyers and litigants. The entireexercise is driven by a new awareness of the importance of making our justicesystem user-friendly. This necessarilyrequires a broadscale effort involving notmerely the formal bench and bar, butusers, providers, legislators, and many volunteers. Reform is no longer a closelyheld job for the insider. I would add thissobering caveat: There is a danger that, so much having been done with so fewfinancial resources during the past fewyears, the conclusion might be drawn thatthere is no need for additional funding.Sadly, this is not the case. The Mainecourt system is seriously underfunded. A grand total of fifty-seven judges at alllevels to administer justice to over amillion and a quarter people spread overterritory half the size of New Englandmeans that all judges are working at orbeyond what should be expected of them.The new approaches discussed here are,for judges, hands-on and labor intensive.And funding for the providers of legalservices for the indigent has not begun tocatch up with the needs identified by theMuskie Commission a dozen years ago. The current profile of Maine courtreform reveals the fullest reliance on self-help, initiative, use of volunteers, andcollaboration among bench, bar, and legalservice providers. The time is longoverdue for the legislature to apply equal commitment to addressing and pursuingover time the priority needs of Maine’sjustice system.  Frank M. Coffin is aSenior United StatesCircuit Judge on theFirst Circuit Court of Appeals, where hehas served since 1965.Prior to that JudgeCoffin practiced law in Lewiston andPortland, was a member of Congress, and Deputy Administratorof the Agency for International Development.From 1995-2000 he chaired the Justice Action Group.…we are in the process of changing part of the roles, missions, and procedures of not only courts and judges, but also lawyers and litigants.S Y M P O S I U M

Court Re-form: The Maine Way

https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1250&amp;context=mpr

Court Re-form: The Maine Way

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Maine