How Do We Maintain Financial Order in the Court?
As Connecticut continues its financial convulsions, nary a word has been uttered about attempting to make the operation of the judicial branch more efficient.
February 09, 2018 at 02:30 PM
3 minute read
As Connecticut continues its financial convulsions, nary a word has been uttered about attempting to make the operation of the judicial branch, in conjunction with those functions of the executive branch which involve the justice system, more efficient. Rather, the approach to this crisis has been ad hoc layoffs with little consideration to the conduct of business leaving some offices critically short of personnel while others have undergone little or no impact. In some courts there are as many public defenders, who have a portion of the docket, as there are prosecutors who have the entire docket. Some clerk's offices have been gutted while others have been barely impacted.
A more comprehensive approach is warranted.
Few would argue that our courts are models of business efficiency. Perhaps the nature of its task, to ensure the dispensing of justice, is not entirely consistent with a model that would pass muster at a reputable business school. Yet the now-chronic fiscal woes of the state demand some effort be made to develop ways in which to run our judicial system in a more efficient manner.
The criminal justice system provides an excellent example of a governmental function that could be operated for less money. The current number of personnel, prosecutors, and public defenders was developed decades ago to meet a growing crime rate that required additional help to address expanding court dockets. That crime rate has substantially abated to levels that have not been seen for many years. A casual observer of the criminal courts will notice that many courts conclude their docket during the morning session and lie empty all afternoon.
However, the personnel levels have not been adjusted to reflect this substantial reduction in the number of cases. Given the deplorable state of our budget, the time has long passed for the judicial system to consider what reductions can be made without compromising its function.
Two ideas merit consideration. One, reinstitute part-time employees. Decades ago both the prosecutors and public defenders used part-time employees on a statewide basis. They were useful and productive in providing services only when they were needed at less cost than a full-time employee. They were eliminated many years ago for unknown reasons. Given the reduced state of the current dockets, this approach should be resurrected.
Second, consider the consolidation of some of the G.A. courts. There is simply little or no reason for some of these low-volume courts, with their full complement of personnel and cost of operating the facility, to exist in this dire fiscal environment. It would provide no undue hardship for a portion of the state population to require them to travel somewhat further to attend court nor would it adversely impact the quality of justice. Courts that are functioning on what is essentially a part-time basis are currently far too expensive to continue to operate.
We support the formation of a task force to determine ways to operate the criminal justice system more efficiently. Connecticut's financial crisis, whose origins extend far past the borders of the judicial system, will never be resolved by a more fiscally responsible court system, but it will help and perhaps provide a positive example for the other branches of government.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThe Stormy Daniels 'Hush Money' Trial: Donald Trump Should Be Very Worried
7 minute readShining a Light on Opposing Hate: The Palestinian Protesters Who Defended New Haven's Menorah
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1We the People?
- 2New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 3No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 4Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 5Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250