- Grantee Spotlights
- Priority Investment Areas
- Grant Management
- About SJI
The Access to Justice Lab at Harvard Law School and LaGratta Consulting LLC are conducting a randomized control trial examining the effects of in-person versus remote hearings for self-represented family law litigants in the 3rd Judicial District Court of Utah (Salt Lake County). The project intends to examine case outcomes and litigant experience in both contexts. All four commissioners hearing family law matters agreed to participate in this innovative effort.
The research team sorted cases randomly between in-person and remote contexts. As litigants left each court appearance, they were asked to answer a few questions about their experience via an iPad kiosk at the back of the courtroom or a follow-up email, with approximately 20 percent of litigants responding so far.
Early data trends suggest matters proceeded similarly regardless of medium, with little effect on time to disposition or appearance rates. The exception was in litigants’ ratings of perceived fairness, which was significantly lower in remote proceedings. Given the documented connection between perceptions of fairness and voluntary compliance, public trust, and system legitimacy, remote proceedings may come at a steep cost without targeted mitigation strategies to narrow this gap.
Data collection is still underway, with final results and corresponding policy and practice recommendations expected in 2024. Download a mid-project brief here or contact Emily LaGratta (Emily@lagratta.com) and Renee Danser (email@example.com) with questions or comments.
October 1, 2022
In 2020, the Kentucky Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) received a SJI grant to assess the court’s access to and use of mental health and substance use recovery services within the community. Funding allowed the Crime and Justice Institute (CJI) to conduct an assessment of strengths, opportunities and challenges that judges, court personnel and …
September 1, 2022
The emergence of COVID-19 has had widespread effects throughout the court system and quarantine orders slowed operations. The Supreme Court of Ohio anticipated an influx of evictions and foreclosure filings in Ohio’s trial courts, as well as a backlog of civil cases. Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor directed the Office of Court Services to convene stakeholders …
August 1, 2022
King County, Washington, was ground zero for the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. The Washington State Supreme Court suspended most court operations in all courts on March 18, 2020. Acknowledging access to justice is of critical importance, King County Superior Court (KCSC) leadership vowed to continue to hold matters on all …
July 1, 2022
Juvenile court judges are the most important public figures in the juvenile justice system–their decisions impact whether hundreds of thousands of youth each year become court involved and for how long, whether they are involuntarily removed from their homes and communities, and the services they receive. Despite the importance of these judges, states and locales …
June 1, 2022
Each county in Mississippi contains its own Justice Court where community members bring legal actions to settle local, small-dollar disputes. Court regulations and policies vary in each county, and they can be incredibly confusing for Mississippians to navigate, almost all of which are pro se litigants. The COVID-19 pandemic created more variation as judges and …
May 2, 2022
Participating in the judicial system can be traumatic and stressful. Mediation is a tool used for resolving many judicial matters, thus mediators often encounter disputants experiencing the worst time of their lives. With this in mind, Texas Dispute Resolution System™ (TDRS) began a process to enhance their mediators’ skills and knowledge when engaging disputants during …