|
South Central Regional Conference
on Pro Se Litigation
Conference Notebook |
| |
#
of pages |
| |
Opening Dinner - Keynote Address
by Hon. Jess H. Dickinson |
|
| |
|
Why Courts Should Care About
Self-Represented Litigants |
14 |
|
|
|
|
| Tab
1 |
Participant
Information |
|
| |
Annotated Agenda |
8 |
| |
Participant Roster |
4 |
| |
State Delegation Roster |
1 |
| |
Faculty Roster |
2 |
| |
Faculty
Biographies |
6 |
| |
|
|
| Tab
2 |
Plenary A:
Judges and Court Staff - Facilitating Access while Maintaining Neutrality |
| |
“Reaching Out or
Overreaching—Judicial Ethics and the Self-Represented Litigant,” Cynthia
Gray (PPT) |
8 |
| |
“Proposed Best Practices
for Cases Involving Self-Represented Litigants” |
7 |
| |
“Why Are There So Many
Self-Represented Persons These Days?,” John Greacen (PPT) |
2 |
| |
“Legal information v. legal
advice—Developments during the last five years,” John Greacen, 84
Judicature 198 (Jan-Feb ’01) |
7 |
| |
“May I Help You—Legal
Advice vs. Legal Information: A Resource Guide for Court Clerks” © Judicial
Council of California (2003) |
12 |
| |
Guidelines & Instructions
for Clerks Who Assist Pro Se Litigants in Iowa Courts |
42 |
| |
|
|
|
Tab 3 |
Plenary B:
The Role of Attorneys in Pro Se Litigation |
|
| |
An Analysis of Rules that
Enable Lawyers To Serve Pro Se Litigants,
A White Paper, ABA Standing Committee on the Delivery of Legal Services,
April 2005 |
60 |
| |
Louisiana Rule 6.1:
Voluntary Pro Bono Public Service |
1 |
| |
Mississippi Rule 6.1 |
6 |
| |
Delaware Rule 6.5:
Non-profit and court-annexed limited legal-service programs |
1 |
| |
Family Law Facilitator Act
(California Codes) |
4 |
| |
Guidelines for the
operation of family law information centers (CA Rules of Court) |
5 |
| |
Statement Regarding Public
Comment |
2 |
| |
Office of the Family Law
Facilitator
Disclosure Form (California) |
1 |
| |
California ACCESS Center
Sign-in Sheet |
1 |
| |
Handbook
for the San
Francisco Superior Court ACCESS Volunteers |
10 |
| |
California Pro Se
Questionnaire |
1 |
| |
|
|
| Tab
4 |
Breakout I: Using
Technology To Assist Self-Represented Litigants |
|
| |
Using Technology to Assist Self-Represented LItigants (PPT) |
20 |
| |
Hotlines Models: A Quick
Comparison of Pros and Cons |
4 |
| |
Components of Start-Up: The
Big Picture |
2 |
| |
Online Resources for
Implementing Intake and Hotline Systems |
1 |
| |
Hotline and Intake
Budgeting |
6 |
| |
“Fundraising for Central
New York Justice Alliance Legal HelpLine Telephone System,” (PPT) |
9 |
| |
Contested Divorce
Questionnaire |
2 |
| |
|
|
| Tab
5 |
Breakout II: Basic
Steps in Planning Self-Help Assistance Activities |
|
| |
“Basic Steps in Planning
Self-Help Assistance Activities” (PPT) |
4 |
| |
The Case for…Self-Help
Programs |
2 |
| |
Materials for Strategic
Planning Meeting (Utah) |
57 |
| |
Strategic Planning
Initiative Report to the Judicial Council (Utah) |
13 |
| |
Fulton County (Atlanta)
Brochure, Family Law Information Center |
2 |
| |
Fulton County (Atlanta)
Program Description |
1 |
| |
|
|
| Tab
6 |
Breakout III: “Unbundling” Legal Services - What It Means, How to Do It,
Pitfalls to Avoid” |
|
| |
The Case for…The Discrete
Task Assistance Program |
2 |
| |
Roadmap for Implementing a
Successful Unbundling Program |
18 |
| |
Family Law Limited Scope
Representation—Risk Management Materials |
88 |
| |
Delaware Rule 6.5:
Non-profit and court-annexed limited legal-service programs |
1 |
| |
The Family Court of the
State of Delaware —
Entry of Appearance |
1 |
| |
|
|
| Tab
7 |
Breakout IV: Making the
Courthouse Environment and Forms User Friendly for All Litigants, including
the Self-Represented |
|
| |
The Self-Help Friendly
Court (Chapters
3, 4, 24 excerpted) |
18 |
| |
The Case for…Court-Based
Forms and Instructions Programs |
3 |
| |
The Case for…Courtroom
Support Process Programs for Self-Represented Litigation Cases |
2 |
| |
The Maricopa Model, Judge
Norman J. Davis |
11 |
| |
The Genesis:
Why create the
Self-Service Center? October 2003 |
4 |
| |
|
|
| Tab
8 |
Plenary C: Strategic Planning Tips for State Teams; Team Planning Templates |
| |
“Strategic Planning for
Self-Represented Litigation Innovation,” Richard Zorza (PPT) |
5 |
| |
Strategic Planning Options:
Problems, Stakeholders, and Approaches |
1 |
| |
Core Materials on
Self-Represented Litigation Innovation, December 2006 |
8 |
| |
Executive Summary; Key
Findings; Recommendations (California
Judicial Council Task Force on Self-Represented Litigants) |
8 |
| |
Utah
Strategic Planning
Report to the Judicial Council (see Tab 5) |
13 |
| |
Planning Template
A—Designing a Planning Process (for jurisdictions with little or no
assistance for self-represented litigants) |
4 |
| |
Planning Template
B—Planning Enhancement or Expansion (for states/ jurisdictions with some project(s) in place) |
4 |
| |
|
|
| Tab
9 |
Program Showcase |
| |
Utah Strategic Planning
Process - John Greacen |
|
| |
Ethics Rules that provide
safe harbor to attorneys who assist the self-represented - Will Hornsby |
|
| |
Three-County Regional
Collaboration Model, including teleconferenced one-on-one assistance by
legal staff and teleconferenced workshops on forms completion - Bonnie Hough |
1 |
| |
Legal Services
Corporation’s Technology Initiative Grant Program - Joyce Raby |
1 |
| |
Idaho’s Interactive Court
Forms Project - Michael Dennard |
1 |
| |
Maricopa County Family
Court User-Friendly Project and re-engineering resources to provide services
without additional costs - Judge Norman Davis |
1 |
| |
Mississippi Volunteer
Lawyers Project - Shirley Williams |
1 |
| |
Arkansas Legal Services
Website - Vince Morris |
1 |
| |
Georgia Website,
Pro Se
Assistance to Rural Litigants and Mobile Center - Michael Monahan |
1 |
| |
Fulton County, Georgia;
Family Law Information Center -Granvette Matthews |
2 |
| |
Texas Legal Services Center
Website - Neish Carroll |
|
| |
Bexar County (San Antonio)
Court-Based Pro Se Services - John J. Specia, Jr. |
1 |
| |
Jefferson County, Kentucky;
Court-Based Pro Se Services - Judge Stephen George |
1 |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
