 I see a bunch of familiar faces in the room including Alan and Sarah so I know that some of you will have heard some of what I'm thinking I'm going to say today before and if I see the eyes start to glaze over then I'll know it's time to watch my new subject. Here are my notes and the reason I say that is that I'm very comfortable having this be very informal. I wasn't here for the morning. I think I have a bit of a sense of what you all talked about this morning but if you think I'm veering off from where I should be just give me some sort of sign and we'll get back on track and I guess the final introductory point I would make is that please interrupt with questions or comments as far as I'm concerned, is that alright with you Maury? And maybe I'll talk, we haven't even coordinated between ourselves this is how we're talking about those. Yeah that will be fine. But maybe I'll just talk for a few minutes about the whole Access to Justice Commission initiative etc. Marty is in charge as you've just heard of the state law libraries, the trial court law libraries and she's got some incredible people and incredible resources available that you'll want to know about if you don't already but I thought I would try to sort of set the larger context and I could get really large if you permit me but the sort of starting point for what I'm going to talk about is this very basic principle that I articulate to myself at least as follows and it is that the rule of law is really not available for anyone if it's not available for everyone. And what I mean by that I think is pretty self-evident if we all can't have confidence that our system of law works for everyone then it really doesn't work for anyone because there's always a chance that that other person is going to be somebody that you're bumping into. The question is how to ensure that our justice system however you find that, we could spend weeks just talking about that question, that our justice system is equally accessible to everybody who needs access to it. Massachusetts historically this is my take and you should know that I practiced in Massachusetts for 15 years before I became a judge about 10 years ago so that's how long I've been bouncing off of the justice system in Massachusetts and my sense is that we've done a good job, a real good job in Massachusetts at a kind of ad hoc level of keeping this notion in mind and ensuring that we have to make our justice system accessible but that it has been fairly ad hoc for a long time. That started to change I think about five plus years ago with the establishment of something called the Access to Justice Commission under the auspices of the Supreme Judicial Court. Before I go any further let me explain that I think what you all talked about some of this morning is sort of how to access the theory of the law and what I think I'm more going to talk about is how you access the process of the law or the procedures that are necessary for the rule of law to sort of galvanize the rule of law for yourself. So Access to Justice Commission was created under the auspices of the Supreme Judicial Court about five plus years ago that is there's been a sort of national trend to do this and so we went by far not the first state to do it there are probably at this point about 35 or more Access to Justice commissions around the country and typically the role of those commissions is to see the justice system writ large from 30,000 feet for lack of a better metaphor to look down at a system that's comprised of the courts, the legal services community, the private bar, academia, social service agencies, executive branch agencies and to see how they are all interacting with one another so as to ensure that this system in its entirety is as accessible as possible. We decided I was very privileged to serve on the Access to Justice Commission from its inception and the first thing we decided to do was to go around the state and convene a series of hearings for public hearings around the state with panels of sort of all sorts of people judges other court employees regular people lawyers to ask this question of what are the barriers to Access to Justice in Massachusetts and what ideas do you all have about how to reduce those barriers so we did a series of those hearings we issued a series of reports and a number of the reports recommended that in order to make the trial courts themselves more accessible it would be important to have an office within the trial court focused specifically on Access to Justice so finally that happened a year ago this week actually and I was very honored to be appointed as special advisor to the trial court for that purpose and I work with a woman named Sandy Lundy who's a senior lawyer at the SJC Supreme Judicial Court and she's the deputy advisor so I'm going to tell you now quickly what we've been sort of looking at for the last year and what we're trying to do and then maybe I'll bounce it over to Marnie and back to you and we'll see where this all goes. We thought that we had a sort of sense from the hearings that were done by the Access to Justice Commission and from the reports of various other committees that have looked at the needs in particular of self-represented litigants I think more often more accurately described as unrepresented litigants I actually think there's a difference between self-represented and unrepresented litigants and we'll see both of them. Incidentally 8 out of 10 litigants in my court are self- represented so that's the reality that we're looking at but we thought we had a sense of what the sort of critical needs were but to check that we did a couple of things we just talked to everybody that we knew to talk to sort of over last summer and then in the fall we rolled out an electronic survey of all of our trial court employees to ask them what do you have in your workplace in your at your court under these various categories of things that enhance Access to Justice like advocates and technology and multi-lingual staff etc. What do you have in your workplace and using that same list what do you need that you don't have and that very simple instrument allowed us to gather and then chart the data documenting the disconnect between what people at least working within the court and obviously this is a specific perspective but the data of at least what people working within the court think we need most and have least and not surprisingly although interestingly in terms of its unanimity and uncontrovertibility that's a word everyone across the trial court judges clerk's probation clerical people everybody across our seven trial court departments and across the state everyone's responses coalesced just a few areas the overwhelming consensus was that we needed services for self-represented litigants we needed a set of self-help centers in court houses we needed self-help materials we needed everything to help people who are trying to access the courts on their own that's one thing a second thing was we needed everything having to do with multi with language services more interpreters more interpreters outside of the courtroom we probably do a pretty good job of getting people interpreters for their courtroom proceedings but something like 90% of what goes on in a courthouse does not happen in a courtroom it happens in a hallway at a clerk's office at a probation office we need more interpreters for those interactions we need more multi-label staff we need multi-label forms I mean with very few exceptions all our forms all our court forms are in English so one anecdote I've heard from someone for example is a probation officer who has to spend an hour of her time working with a Spanish speaking what do they call probation me probation nerve translating a form from English to Spanish so that he can complete it rather than just having that form in Spanish so she can do her work for an hour so multi-legal forms multi-legal self-help materials multi-legal staff everything having to do with language services and then the third and this is where this might be in particular interest to you is everything having to do with technology we don't have internet access in most of our courthouses it's a big problem for employees it's a big problem for lawyers and it's not just that folks want to be shopping at LLB it's that you know so much of what we need now to do our jobs is available efficiently over the internet and if we don't have internet access that's a big problem we also don't have the capacity with some limited exceptions to engage court transactions remotely online we don't have multimedia resources in large part so that if we have a self-help pamphlet that's not very helpful to an illiterate litigant and we have many of them not just not English speaking but illiterate even in their native languages we don't have the audio and the video counterpart that would be useful for that person so those that little survey which I people have heard me say this before I know but I joke that Sandy and I did this on the professional equivalent of a cocktail napkin sketch out your addition for your house or your landscaping plan on the napkin that's really just wrote out this instrument very simple but it really helped us to chart the path for what we are doing and are going to do moving forward and so here's what we're doing and then I'm gonna turn it over to Marnie or open it up for questions as you prefer we are focused on five projects and we're at different stages of them but they're all moving forward I'm very pleased to report one is that we have completed the work that was started by Marnie and others developing a manual by and for the staff of our clerk offices our clerk offices to delineate this tricky question of the difference between legal information which we in the courts are and you in libraries that are are encouraged and probably obligated to provide and legal advice which is this thing we're absolutely not supposed to I don't say that facetiously that's true but a lot of our court staff we have found are more conservative than they need to be more cautious than they need to be about that line and they do it of a a they do it out of an impulse to make sure that they're not doing something wrong so that's to be commended but what we came to understand is that if we could reassure them about where that line is and how they can be on the right side of it and still be helpful that they really wanted that sort of guy so we have completed a manual on that and we're rolling out a series of training sessions around it for our court staff starting in the fall the second thing we're doing is we're rolling out something called LAR limited assistance representation sometimes known as limited scope representation or unbundling and that's the notion that a lawyer and a client can enter into a relationship for limited assistance lawyer doesn't have to take on the client's entire case lawyer can agree for instance to do a just a pretrial conference in the divorce or just a mediation in the eviction case and thereby make more lawyers available to more litigants than is the case if either on a provono or fee for service basis the lawyer has an open-ended commitment LAR limited assistance representation is now fully operational in the promoted family court in messages it's just been picked up by the Boston Municipal Court for civil cases it's about to be picked up by the district court for civil cases and the housing court so we're trying to roll that out and promote it and market it as a tool both provono and fee for service quickly the three other things we're doing is we're piloting an information center at the court house for self-help materials to try to take some of the confusion and demand that presents at the clerk's offices or in the courtrooms and deflect that to a place where there are resources available to deal with it and thereby take the burden off our incredibly overburdened staff and make sure that once things get to a courtroom they've been organized in a way that the courtroom can respond to and then we're working on forms making them uniform big big project simple multilingual multimedia capable of being completed online and the same for self-help materials so that's what we're doing and and that is all under the auspices of what we call the access to justice initiative which is a trial court based office in Massachusetts and separate then although obviously interconnected to the access to justice commission which is this thing that has the 30,000 of you view of the entire justice system and through that mission we hope to reach out to many people like yourselves to help us with resources that we need within the courts and outside the courts to sort of fulfill some of these goals that we laid out for ourselves okay so I feel like I'm Joan enjoying my age here I also thought I should start this out by saying I'm here to do reality testing to represent the simple people when I started in my career when Proctor did my job said this morning there was no mass quota regulations you received different print once the good news was that the state bookstore at least would put them together for you in a box so you've got a box like this that you went through and you're trying to figure out how to organize it and we never had a all I didn't know what was there or not there but as I mentioned this morning in 1976 the first edition of the CMR was published it was blue and about 20 volumes and then the second edition came along and it was 25 volumes and the binders are getting thicker and now you can't even fit everything in the binder so you bring in your own binder all it would just to make the point that we are in a regulated society and I do not see that trend changing it's like something goes wrong and what are we going to do we're going to make more regulations so somehow it's done this morning we've got to make it accessible to people about how they can follow the laws so I thought for reality testing I asked a couple of my staff members on Monday and Tuesday remember we do reference by internet well by instant messaging email in person and phone so I don't know how these all came in but I asked them just keep their questions and what did people ask for so and this is the list it is not exhaustive but you didn't need to be here many of you were librarians do this every day it's more than non librarians that you know what we do so here are the questions that are coming in to us does a restroom have to have a bathroom wait does a restroom just getting a ticket for tinted windows which I've now removed meet my car insurance premiums will go up by the way the same Lawrence does my employer have to pay me when I report to jury duty my friend was charged with this crime the good news is they had the site to it so at least we can look that up can you tell me what it is and it turned out it was criminal harassment you have a case studying on Kathleen versus Donovan this person had been referred to this case by someone who wanted to read it it's about a temporary emergency custody of a child to a parent fleeing to Massachusetts from another state to avoid and then allegedly abusive situation so we didn't get to why that person really needed it but we understood what the case was that they wanted and from this morning I do want to say I wasn't going to read this one but I think it gets into the complexity of what we're doing for state tax person somebody needed to have the definition of a salesman now this is what they had to look up got to get the answer they used the 1954 internal revenue code some other regulations of the 1950s the Senate Finance Committee report from 1954 because Massachusetts uses that as their definition so you got to go to the federal to figure out what we use and they also have to use the mass law sprays TRIs to be honest I don't know what a TRI is letter rulings directives related to the definition of salesman or a salesperson from 1975 to 1988 now this was a tax question I mean and just think of what they did for that one so my other questions are I love this one my ex took out a restraining order on me you know I can read the law I want to know section and verse this came in written I want a statue like the Statue of Liberty on limitations on suing someone for slander and defamation can you send me an unpublished unreported case and we turned out it was for secondary source and we were able to do it and one of the other fun ones that comes in and one of the things that I think we still haven't thought strongly enough is access to past laws one of the answers to the question was and that was over the Internet so we made it simple it looks like the 1995 change only changed the words in the first paragraph of 65 years to 60 years so if you change it back to 65 years you should have the 1982 law you know because you could do the history of what you've got in front of us but we can't find necessarily the 1995 laws as they existed or the 1982 we could figure out how to me and we're back and forth but to be honest snapshots of the laws now that would be very helpful and at least we don't have to do one for one point we still have to probably massage over that but do that so I guess the point of this and mine was really to be sure was to bring you up to some reality is that people really don't know that they need the law until something comes up in their lives and so I want the uprising that you have from the from the grassroots but the fact of it in that area is in my mind that it's the people in this room they even understand what the problem is that have to be those grassroots because my patrons walking in are not even going to be thinking of this till they're asking for what is the restraining order of me you know they're hoping never to have to have a restraining order now they need it and so I really do want to say that I'm invested in this I you know I've done a whole career on access to the law this is sort of where I feel like it's going to end is to try to finish the job that many of us have been working on for years hopefully before I it's not gonna be done before I retire but maybe before I go to my own funeral so I really want to say that all of us who are here I'm hoping we're here for all different reasons but then all those take on some commitment to take a piece of this because the general public doesn't understand it and it's up to us to make it understandable and have realities do you can you access your website before before we Sandy Levy the deputy advisor and I decided early on in our work about a year ago that we are motto for this initiative was going to be who knew because we just kept discovering things that we realized we should have known but didn't for instance I knew very little about Marnie's trial court law library website and including the fact that available through the trial court law library website is a computer guide another some problems with it but there's a computer guided interview program that enables and facilitates a tenant and answering a summary process in the fiction case I'm a housing court judge and I didn't know that that existed on our own trial court law library website so and we just kept stumbling across that sort of thing and so when I sort of get together with a group like this and I see that there are people from the executive branch here and people from other aspects of our society I think that phenomenon just is multiplied millions fold in terms of what we don't know about what's already out there to help the people we're all trying to help how to access each other's resources I don't know what the answer to this is I mean we were having we were chatting before the session started about the fact that we all tend to operate in our own little universes I think an important thing is to make sure that we all know that our universe is not the universe and that there are universes beyond ours but and as I say I don't know what the answer is I do think that gatherings like this that just at least start the process of communicating some information across these silos or universes that we all operate in is a good thing but it would be great if there was somebody way way way up here that could just sort of you know point every all of us in the right direction when we needed stuff that's already out there that we don't know about so would this be a good time to show the people have any questions I actually have a question when you were talking about your five goals for access to justice and the last two one was forms and the other was I think some materials give any timetable for those things okay yes and no is the real answer the task forces that are working on those particular projects are actively meeting they're starting their work and the overarching principle is don't wait to be able to do everything before you do anything start and in that vein Phil Malone and I and some others are working on we've just worked on a letter of support for a technology innovation grant that is being processed by some legal services programs here in Massachusetts that would it be interesting Phil do you think I should talk about a to j author I think I could punch that because that's a great way to make a legal process available okay great so I'll talk about this for a minute so there are four legal services programs that have come together in Massachusetts and applied for a technology innovation grant from the legal services corporation and the trial court has agreed to be a grant partner assuming the grant is awarded and we're hopeful that it will be and we've written a letter of support for this grant and Phil Malone and his crew at the Bergman have been very helpful both at providing their own support for the grant application and helping us understand us the trial court understand what it means for us to support this application so this project is about in a big way trying to take the legal services website mass legal help dot org and convert it into a real virtual self-help center where people can really find everything that they need to engage legal services and access the court system one big piece of that would be to use a program I think is the right word called a to j author which was developed by mr. stout at University of Illinois Kent Law School Chicago Kent Law School sorry this this gentleman Chicago Kent Law School did this study max a few years ago I think I've got this right and you'll Google it you'll correct me if I'm wrong about it but did a white paper essentially on how to leverage law students that's what it's called leveraging law students to promote access to justice and so they looked at the various ways in which law students could be used to enhance access of justice from serving as advocates to providing research and what they ended up thinking was that the best use of at least tech savvy law students was to use them to develop this a to j author program which is used to as I understand it used by legal services programs and courts to design interviews computer guided interviews for self-represented litigants whereby the litigant goes through the interview very simple very simple interface very straightforward very problem-oriented not legalistic etc. and in answering the questions that are put to her that there's a is actually filling in fields in a pleading so if the question is what's your problem I'm being evicted unbeknownst to her that's been triggering this whole logic thing that takes her down the eviction path so that she can end up with a completed answer to an eviction case so a to j author is the tool that's used to design the content and I think the the reality of these interviews these computer guided interviews this TIG grant technology innovation grant would be used to develop a series of those a to j author guided interviews to be used online to produce court forms that was a very long answer to your question about court forms so that if that if that grant comes through first of all will know in the fall money will start to flow in January 11 and we've identified a series of forms that we would like to start with those being forms that are have multi-department use in the trial court so we can get a lot of bang for the luck and also are most commonly used by self-represented litigants and affidavit of indigency for instance is how indigent folks tend to initiate their civil cases so they don't have to be a filing fee it would be and they're used in all the court departments so that an abuse prevention petition a petition for restraining order in a domestic violence situation those are used in several of our court departments and the idea would be that ultimately there would be an e-filing piece to this so that and to use the example that we were talking about before the session of someone who's the victim of domestic violence who lives way out in the hinterlands where you know far remote from a district court or family court for instance if she could go into a public library or a domestic violence shelter or somewhere with the assistance of a social worker or a librarian complete this interview that would produce a petition for a restraining order that could then be e-filed to her district court or when we judges who do round-the-clock emergency response after hours and on weekends when we get the call from the police at 3 o'clock in the morning and we're handling this request for restraining order in the middle of the night it would be so great if we could be actually looking at our own laptops at the petition that she's filed and then hit send and it goes to the district court where she needs to show up in the morning and back to the police department when an order is issued that's the idea that's the vision I mean it's the visions getting pretty large but that's that's the idea so the the I guess the short answer to your question is that we're working on things already we're letting the our access to resources guide our priorities a little bit there's no money you may have heard and I give you a follow-up because I'm co-chairing the self-taught materials task force and actually you could all be very helpful again on the who knew there are actually quite a few print resources out there that different courts have done on their own are we unified absolutely not so what we've decided to do is to try to collect what we think are the best of these and to be honest we don't even know what the best is we're gonna know it when we see you know we've got some criteria but we'll do that with the hope that at least even getting them up on the internet meaning the internal side and the internet so that other courts who haven't even gotten this far would move in this direction obviously I think in the end we'd like to have a uniform and make sure that they all meet you know worth great reading levels and all these other things that would be helpful but that's what we're hoping to do I think within the next six months to a year but you can all be helpful because it would be good to know what you mean I mean we're working on task force it's we have legal services people only got people from the courts but if any of you consistently again we're going for the biggest man for our buck but if there's some topic or something that you need that's over and over comes up one let me know don't develop it because we may already have it or at least we can just change something but it would be helpful to have your perspective in all of this too because I think the more perspectives we bring to this place the better will write them or make them responsive for people you know the hope is like special for you as librarians you know that when the person comes to you we don't keep shuffling around let you know if somebody comes to the state library and for some reason they can't answer the question pick up the moment call a private library don't send them to Uber let's try to solve the issue where the person is if we have a chance doesn't always work but let's try it if we can do that other questions or comments I heard that 50 percent of applicants to the legal services corporation are turned down and actually when I talked to professor tribes staff at the Department of Justice he says that's an underestimate because what happens on Tuesday they know that they're fully to stop taking applicants I've also heard that 80% of the needs of the legal needs of the poor are unmet these are national figures is that reflect Massachusetts and is there a difference between let's say Boston and the rural areas and the other cities I would say they're famous like what we are I don't know about the urban and the urban sense they have legal services and stuff too so there's like it I would say suburbia probably is the best and then you've got similar problems rural I think those data are relatively applicable to Massachusetts certainly there's enormous unmet need just enormous some of which we know about some of which we don't know about but as a judge who sits in Western Mass I also think it's fair to say that there are more resources in Boston than there are outside of Boston and I'll give you an example we in the housing court so that there are seven trial court departments in Massachusetts the housing court department is one of them and there are five divisions of the housing court around the state each of the divisions has a lawyer for the day program which is a pro bono program where lawyers come and represent people under a standing order that allows them to just do a limited piece of the work if that's what they choose to do so we have one in my court in Western Mass but there are weeks when I get the email from the bar association saying sorry we couldn't get a volunteer for this week I came to Boston with one of the women who runs that program to just watch how the Boston lawyer for a day program operates in the housing court and there was like an embarrassment of riches I mean first of all the Harvard the late euro was there on mass it looked like and so lawyers and law students and then in Boston big firms pick up a month they'll say we'll do every Thursday for a month goodwin proctor will do everything and so there were literally more volunteers than there were people who wanted to use that in Boston there were there was this room full of people sitting waiting for mediation and one of the volunteer lawyers walked into the room and said does anyone want free legal assistance with your mediation and no one said yes so but so that that makes two points one is the disparity and we're having something we've called a pro bono summit in the Springfield on Monday where I'm trying to generate more volunteer help for our lawyer today program but but also and it was as me who I think was the one who said well if I'm if I'm here in Boston on a Thursday and I'm not needed then someone from Springfield could maybe I am me or you know dude I could maybe help someone remotely if the technology existed to make that possible so that's another thing that we should all be sort of thinking and talking about is how to level the how to achieve parity across the state without having to move bodies to use sort of virtual assistance to try a little bit and another sort of sigh answers of what you brought up is in what 2004 2005 the trial court law libraries did something called navigating the legal maze where we pulled together in a group what the first year was concentrated on legal services kind of organizations really loosely in the second year was on social services with the idea that when people have to say turn somebody down is there another place that's appropriate for them to refer them to that might be able to take them I mean it depends on what the issue is they don't need legal services you know they need the tendency preservation you know and so we really try to get people referring and it worked for a while but people change and I will say in here in Nevada one of the county law libraries in Nevada where they have all their social services legal services there and even in pictures so the problem is money you put on the money bag you know housing there's a little house but it pulls up by county and city or whatever what the resources are because I think we do turn people down but I also think we don't get them to the person who actually might be able to help them and I don't quite know how to get from point A to B other than I think Nevada at least web-wise has done the best job of organizing the content to at least allow anybody whether your legal services are like worrying somebody in court to say okay what's really available right here for the issue in Minnesota Minnesota also has an incredible self-help infrastructure in its court system and we just learned a little bit about what they have at the Justice Conference in Arizona in May they have this you know how when you have a problem with your computer and you call your IT thing they come on your computer with you you see the little thing and well they can do that litigants to who are trying to fill out forms so it again is at a public access terminal and calls a remote number and the person on the other end can get on the computer with her and ask her questions and help her fill out that form even though there's not a person standing in front of her to do it so leveraging technology is just a huge opportunity and challenge and what else a quick observation based on the last few bits of discussion in our chat but we're here really I seem in keeping with the general idea a lot I've got to make all primary legal materials available openly available online combined with trying to bring together all these different sources of help and ability to file ability to access the legal system the more that we can somehow bring those all either into one place whether it's all libraries or kind of broad or legal websites in some ways so that people seeking legal help can access lots of different pieces at least figure out what's there is that you don't know what you don't know and that who knew the more that we can somehow bring those together in really simple websites that help people quickly get channeled to what they want but not just get to statutes not just get to court decisions may get to legal aid groups or might get to the court's own set of forms of the court's own cell that seems like a fabulous holy grail to shoot for where you kind of find it all in one place and easily navigate it to get to whichever piece and a couple of things about that first of all obviously that kind of resource needs to be problem-based not technically not you know people need to be able to say I'm having this problem I don't know what you call it I don't even know what court I go to about it but here's my problem and that should be it seems to be the entry point to this network but also given the reality two other points there are a huge percentage and I just want to put this out there and be honest about it there's a big percentage and I don't know what the percentages but there's a big percentage of self-represented litigant that's not going to be able to use even a simple tool like that so a secondary benefit of a tool like that is that it leverages advocates to so now the lay at the lay but sophisticated advocate whether it be the person at the shelter or at the Department of Transitional Assistance or whatever she knows how to use that tool so if what we're dealing with is a litigant who couldn't use it himself but he can get the assistance of someone at a social service agency etc then that just sort of leverages the increases the pool of advocates that are available to help and then the final point I'll make is because we you know just either listening watching that and listening to the questions that came in and the law libraries some of those are once a year questions once a lifetime questions what we obviously don't need to do is design a system that takes care of that those sorts of things I don't think I think we need to take care of the the questions we get over and over the cases we get over and over 60% of our translation services in Massachusetts are used for Spanish speaking people in district court so that tells us something about where we want to put some resources in terms of translating forms and selling out materials probably first into Spanish for forms that are used in district court and so I think when we talk about this one-stop shopping it's not realistic to think that we can cover every legal need every piece of legal effort but we could certainly deal with the things that come up over and over and my summary piece on that would be that the American Library Association is very close almost every public library has internet access and so to overlook the idea that public libraries are sitting in almost every community or county or whatever however you're organized throughout the country is to overlook a huge resource and again librarians are very different in terms of their skill level but they know enough to pick up the phone and call somebody to say I don't know help me out and that's you know so so they're in the honor public library and calling the strength you can work with the question so I know I'm supposed to bring up wanting to put their records online all these issues the privacy came up in the technical capacity needed to deal with those issues and some ports like way ahead and they found out they do mistakes and scale that is all that stuff kind of like adding to the money and all the I don't know everything there was to know about that by a long shot what we are we are in the process in the Massachusetts state courts of rolling out a uniform case management system that's a really good thing turns out that having a uniform case management system is necessary you'll understand this way more than I do but is necessary in order to be able to have certain tools like e-filing so we've got this case management system in place in five of our seven trial court departments and within a year or so we hope to be fully integrated but it of course won't be surprised here doesn't work exactly the way it's supposed to all the time and their problems that up but also this whole what information can we show on public pages is definitely the SJC just recently issued something I forget it's called it's a guideline or something on how to protect private information and all of that so we're starting to pull together the threads of that problem but I don't know that we've solved it let's get the cases first thank you very much