Indiana Trial Court Statistics

Indiana has no idea of the details of what goes on in its courts. We do not because we do not keep those kind of records.

I got thinking on this subject several weeks ago after I had an e-mail regarding statistical information about family law cases. The writer mentioned that they were awaiting information on child custody statistics. Let me list what I know we do not know about family law cases - at the trial level:

1. How often fathers get custody.
2. How often mothers get custody.
3. How often there is a custody modification.
4. How often the father gets custody on a modification.
5. How often the mother gets custody on modification.
6. How often there is a modification of parenting time/visitation.
7. How often child support is modified.
8. What is the average change (up or down) in child support.

What we do know:

1. How many divorces are filed yearly..
2. How many paternity cases are filed yearly.

We know these items because Indiana keeps statistics on the gross number of filings. If you want to check out what statistics are kept and what are the numbers, then go here.

I am sure that someone, somewhere thinks that lawyers and judges would want these numbers. Please remember that most lawyers and judges were not trained in statistics or social sciences. We are trained to think in terms of appellate decisions. Finally, (and I write this only semi-facetiously) lawyers are lawyers because our higher math skills were terrible. Bottom line: we do not think in terms of statistics.

Appellate decisions are much easier to track. These come from one source instead of 92 (the number of counties in Indiana). They are all public and actually online. Trial court judgments require looking at each courts' files.

For those who keep saying that Indiana's courts possess a bias against fathers in custody cases, I have to resort to Scots law: it is unproven. I have discussed this issue with several people and I have been annoyed at my inability to get this point across. Not enough information exists to give us any idea of a problem. (Yes, I know that just having the numbers about who gets custody is not enough to explain why there were certain outcomes.)

On similar point, Madison County has its Children in The Middle Seminar and other counties have similar programs. We have no idea of the effectiveness of these programs. Actually, we have no means of measuring their effectiveness. Having statistics on the subject of modifications or contempt's might give us some insight into how effective are any of these programs.

No, no business would be able to manage its business but never have we - lawyers and judges - thought of the court system as a business.

Before everyone gets up in arms, let me say that our court system lacks any means for implementing any changes to create better statistics. They may be inherently incapable of doing so (see preceding paragraph). Finally, we may never get the money out of the General Assembly for capturing statistical information about our court business.

Indiana Attorney-Client Relationship: Terminating the Relationship

Here, too, exist Local Rules needing followed when lawyers end the relationship.

Some Counties provide for an automatic withdrawal. Allen County's LR02-TR3.1-703 is a very good example:

(3) Automatic Withdrawal. After the entry of a final Decree or Order
that resolves all pending issues, each attorney shall be deemed to have withdrawn his or her appearance upon the occurrence of one of the
following events:
(3.1) The expiration of time within which an appeal of such Decree or Order may be preserved or perfected pursuant to the Indiana Rules of
Trial Procedure and/or the Indiana Rules of Appellate Procedure if no
appeal is filed; or
(3.2) The conclusion of any appeal of such Decree or Order
commenced pursuant to the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure and/or
the Indiana Rules of Appellate Procedure, provided the Trial Court is
notified in writing that the appeal is concluded.
(4) Subsequent Filings and Notices. After withdrawal of an attorney’s
appearance made in the conformity of these rules, the service of any motion, pleading, or notice of hearing upon any party shall be made upon
that party pursuant to Trial Rule 5. A copy of any pleading, motion, or
notice of hearing served upon previous counsel who has withdrawn or is
deemed to have withdrawn under this Rule shall be considered a matter
of professional courtesy only, and is not adequate service of process on
the previously represented party.

oops: PAS, Ohio & Indiana

Well, here is a lesson to be learned: do not blog when tired. Or when the computer is sticking. Or both. I had set this original post down as a draft but it got published instead.

Which actually is pretty interesting considering the comments. As originally published, I did not attribute What Is Parental Alienation And Parental Alienation Syndrome? to The Ohio Family Law Blog.

I did not realize just how much of a mess I had made of things until I read the second comment. I asked myself why is someone asking me about Ohio law when this is obviously an Indiana family law blog. Here are my thoughts:

1. The reader came to me via a Google search and did not look at the whole of the blog (like my title).
2. The reader did not think to click on the link to the original article. Okay, thanks to my negligence last night that was not clearly marked out as a link to another post.
3. #2 leads me to think that a lot of people do not understand how blogging works - that we post articles that are not always wholly contained. Most blog posts are not wholly contained, that is why there are links.
   
4. Which all got me thinking about a post I read from Grant Griffiths' Blogging for Profit, I am shutting off my RSS feed for my blogs….. When I read that post I asked myself how many people understand RSS feeds, read RSS feeds, or even know what are RSS feeds. I have how to subscribe to this blog's RSS feeds clearly marked along the right hand side of this post. I have no idea how many people subscribe to the RSS feeds. I do know that far fewer people subscribe to the e-mail updates than view this blog. I will assume even fewer subscribe via RSS.
   
5. Between what I read about blogging and what I see on this blog especially the comments below, I have the following firm beliefs:

• That people come to blogs looking for specific answers to specific questions but blogs are designed more to provide general information about general issues. At least, this is the structure of this blog.
  
• People stop looking when they think they have the answer to their specific question. This is a mistake on the searcher's part which I do not know how to correct. I have my earlier posts arranged by topics on the right hand side of the blog. Few people seem to realize this. You can go directly to the same topic of this post by clicking on the link below next to the word label. I have noticed this working. I have also tried to cross-link posts myself. This works but this takes a lot of time. (For example, this is not the only article on this blog about PAS).
  
• I am ever more convinced that we who toil in blogging have mistaken the few trees in front of us for the forest. Most people do not use the tool as we think they do.
  
• That in the actual writing, I try to make the headlines interesting for RSS readers while making the content useful for my e-mail subscribers and casual readers. I do not know any other way to cover all my bases but if I cannot cover them then the subscribers are first in my mind. Believe when I say that I write as much as I because of the e-mail subscribers as I think they want to know what is going on with Indiana family law.
  

I will finish this post in the next week as I originally intended to finish it. I found the original article interesting for the difference between Indiana and Ohio law. Indiana has no statute comparable to the Ohio statute mentioned in the original post and which the second commentator refers to. What Indiana has is case law.

Another thought I had about the responses to my prematurely posted article is a bit more complicated and maybe captured better in my responses to the comments. That does not mean I am not going to try.

There exists a huge gap between the public's knowledge and expectations of the family law system. Calling this gap ignorance seems harsh and likely to be misconstrued but may still be apt. Which gets me thinking about the following:

1. Why people do not understand that while general forms may exist among the states, the specifics can be widely different. At this point, I must say that Indiana relies more on case law than does Ohio on the issue of parental interference with visitation creating grounds for a modification of custody.
2. So far as I know, American family law uses an adversarial template for family law. Which limits the ability of courts to call their own witnesses. Which means the default button is for a fight. The only corrective to this default position are the lawyers and their clients. If you are interested in alternatives to an adversarial divorce then use the search box above and search for "collaborative divorce" and then follow up the links in my posts. I firmly believe that the adversarial paradigm shall remain the default until the general public listens to the lawyers who say this is not the only way, it is not the best way, to deal with family law issues. All I can say for Indiana is that, thankfully, we do not have to prove fault to get a divorce.
   
3. The law is not a fast food menu that is interchangeable but a whole system. There are no county child support guidelines or parenting time guidelines but only state guidelines. Even those guidelines do not answer all questions. Indiana has statutes and case law that will apply to the facts. Understand that the system operates on the tension between the facts of each case and the law (which means guidelines, local rules, statutes, trial rules and case law).
4. That most people do not know of their rights. Whether this ignorance is willful or not depends on the person and their lawyer. Attorneys vary on how much they inform their clients. I try but I also have clients who act like they are taking in the information but only to learn they do not process the information. Ask questions if you are a client and offer information if you are a lawyer.
5. Yes, all this costs money. I know Indiana has very few resources available to provide payment of attorney fees. We have statutes allowing for the other side to pay attorney fees but I know few attorneys who will take on a case without some sort of payment. And if the other side has no more money than the client? Yes, I think the situation becomes apparent then. But add to this the use of experts - the psychologist mentioned in the first comment below - and how do the parties afford them? I have some articles under the topic of attorney fees that deal with this issue in a bit more detail. Bottom line? I do not expect the public to fund a system of family law attorneys with their tax dollars - not in our current economic straits.

Oddly, I never thought I would have so much to write about on the subject of family law. I expected just writing about cases and the straight legal issues. Yet, much exists behind the statutes and case law and much of that is people. Which has made writing this blog much more serious for me and much more interesting. Thank you for your support.

Attorney Services and Lessening Client Frustration

Dick Price of Divorce and Family Law in Tarrant County, Texas has a post that ought to be read in full by every person in or contemplating a divorce. That post is How to Minimize Frustration in a Divorce.

I do want to pick on his second point. This concerns a subject that bothered me for years and continues to do so:

"2. Your attorney. Unfortunately, one of the biggest complaints clients have is a lack of communication with their attorney. Many attorneys stay very busy and sometimes they just are not available when a client wants/needs to talk with them. What can you do about that?

* Have a good understanding with your attorney from the outset about what your communication needs are and what the attorney can do. Your attorney may know that (s)he will be unavailable at certain times because of other obligations. Since your problems, needs and concerns don't shut off on a schedule, have a 'Plan B' worked out with the attorney so you can get help from his/her office. Find out your attorney's communication style and abilities in advance. Equally important, let your attorney know about your expectations and needs as well. Get to know the attorney's staff -- they can be very helpful and are usually much more available than the attorney.

* Adjust your expectations. Yes, you are paying a lot of money for legal representation, but you are not the only client with needs and your attorney may try to maintain some sort of personal life outside of work. It's unrealistic to expect an attorney to be at your beck and call 24/7, but you should be able to find out what"

For many years now, it has been my policy to copy clients with all the documents in their case - incoming and outgoing. Emergency matters gets a telephone call. With the Internet, I have been using e-mail for years for the same purposes. I am amazed to find new clients surprised by my policies - this was not something that their former lawyers did not do. I wonder what these lawyers and these clients think service means.

As for the second point, I had to stop giving out my home telephone number because several clients abused calling me at all hours and during the weekend. With a wife who left for work at 5:00 pm, these calls caused several problems. With e-mail she is not disturbed and I am usually available all seven days and into the evening (unless I leave the laptop at the office).

I am still not sure what services the client expects of their lawyer. I think many clients have no idea on this subject. If you have any opinions, please add a comment to this post.

Things That Judges Hate

South Carolina Family Law Blog published Things That Judges Hate. I read it and read thinking what can I add to this post? I decided there just is not anything to add, this is the list. Here it is in full:

"Judges are particularly annoyed by lawyers (and their clients) who:

* ignore the rules of court;
* fail to prepare;
* arrive late;
* repeat themselves;
* act rudely;
* make frivolous arguments;
* mislead the court;
* argue with the judge;
* refuse to talk settlement; and
* request a last-minute continuance."

An Indiana Legal Glossary

The Indiana Judiciary website has a page ofGlossary of Legal Terms. The page does not contain much directly about family law (more that applies to appeals and civil and criminal cases), it may be of some help.

Madison County needs a new court

This post has the distinct possibility of turning into a rant. My apologies if it does, but this is something that I must say.

Madison County, Indiana has four courts for family law cases- Circuit Court and our three Superior Courts. There is also what we call IV-D (that is 4-D) court for child support cases handled by the child support enforcement prosecutor, but that court does not really matter with this discussion. All four courts have one commissioner . The commissioner is a lawyer appointed by the elected judge to hear cases. I used to estimate 99% of all family law cases are heard by commissioners, but that percentage declined when our courts started using senior judges. I will continue to wager that the regular judges hear less than 1% of family law cases in Madison County. (A slight digression - this percentage is probably accurate for most counties without a family law court and is nothing peculiar to Madison County.) Still there remains a huge delay in some of these courts for a hearing date. I see the problem as having two components: 1) space and 2) time.

Four courts means four courtrooms. There are also two hearing rooms. That leaves six rooms for hearing cases, right? Wrong. Circuit Court, Superior Court 1 and Superior Court 3 have criminal jurisdiction. Mondays are devoted wholly to criminal matters. The other days may have criminal trials. Mondays leave one courtroom and two hearing rooms available for civil cases. During the rest of the week criminal matters dictate availability of court space for civil matter.

Nothing will change the precedence given to criminal matters unless we want to amend the federal and state constitutions. I do not advocate any such changes.

Unifying all the courts into a Circuit Court with six divisions is mentioned from time to time (as in about every year there is a race for the Circuit Court judgeship). The idea has some good points in its favor. People favoring the unification point to Muncie and how the Delaware County courts consolidated their Superior Courts and Circuit Court into one Circuit Court with divisions. I am not in Muncie as much as I used to be but I do not see any great problems with their system. I do see a cost that does not get mentioned - the courts employ two full-time commissioners to handle family law matters. Besides the cost to the county for paying their salaries, the commissioners must leave their private practices. Finding that combination in Madison County might be a bit difficult.

Not that Madison County need worry about unifying its courts any time soon. Between the legislative politics needed to get approval for the unification and the politics between the judges in Anderson, it will not happen any time soon.

Frankly, another court will not be added any time soon. The General Assembly would need to pass a statute allowing the court. Besides there would need to be space available in the Madison County Government Center and I cannot see where that will be found.

Looking to Muncie does provide another alternative to ending our backlog of family law cases. The Delaware Courts designate Fridays as their family law day. They have what we call a cattle call - all the cases are set at 9:00 am and they take the cases as they are ready. The procedure helps move the smaller cases - the child support modifications, the contempt cases, the uncontested divorces, the parenting time modifications - quickly through the system. If I recall correctly, the Muncie courts started this procedure before their unification. Putting such a system in place here in Anderson means a good deal of cooperation between our Superior Courts and our Circuit Court. Actually, the system could be put in place with just the Superior Courts and it would still be a great benefit for the parties.

I know that something must be done. Our Superior Court 2 is swamped and I do not see any great difference in the other Superior Courts. All this slows down the adjudication of cases and raises the annoyance level in the clients.