In the INDIANA SUPREME COURT



In The Matter of the Adoption of           )
A Policy Statement on Trial Court         )
Case Management Systems             )
)

Cause No. 94S00-0205-MS-280         )




INDIANA SUPREME COURT POLICY STATEMENT
ON
TRIAL COURT CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

May 13, 2002.

1. The Indiana Supreme Court believes that it is in the best interests of Indiana’s citizens, trial courts, court clerks, law enforcement officials, and lawyers that all of Indiana’s courts maintain their records in a statewide computerized case management system that connects courts across county lines and connects courts with local and state entities that need and use court information. Among other things, with such a system:

(a) Citizens and lawyers will be able to check the status of their cases over the Internet.

(b) A court will be able to transmit electronically an order suspending (or reinstating) a driver's license to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles immediately after making the ruling.

(c) The state will be able to have an extremely accurate electronic registry of all domestic violence protective orders issued by Indiana courts.

(d) A judge facing a criminal defendant in one county will be able to determine electronically whether there are charges pending against that defendant in any other county.

(e) Judges, court clerks, prosecutors, lawyers, and their staffs will be able to process electronically countless transactions that now are performed by hand.

The Supreme Court acknowledges with appreciation that the Indiana General Assembly and the Governor share this vision and have authorized a court filing fee with the proceeds dedicated to the implementation of such a system. At the same time, the Supreme Court recognizes that many counties have acquired their own case management systems and may wish to continue using those systems for the foreseeable future. In order to derive the important public safety and administrative benefits of a statewide computerized case management system while recognizing the desire for local flexibility to the extent consistent this vision, the Supreme Court hereby adopts the following policy on trial court case management systems.

2. The Supreme Court designates the computerized case management system known as Computer Associates International, Inc., Statewide Judicial Case Management Software System as the Indiana statewide trial court case management system, subject to the execution of a definitive agreement between Computer Associates International, Inc., and the Indiana Supreme Court Division of State Court Administration (Division). The Division will provide and install that system at the Division's expense in any county that so requests on the terms described in paragraph 3 below. However, no county will be required to install that system and may at its expense maintain its existing case management system, upgrade its existing system, or acquire and install a different system so long as it complies with the conditions described in paragraph 4 below.

    3. Upon the request of a county’s courts, in cooperation with other appropriate local officials, the Division will provide and install the statewide case management system in the requesting county. The installation of the statewide case management system will be subject to the terms and conditions of a memorandum of understanding between the Division and the county covering the relative responsibilities of the Division and the county for the installation of software and hardware and operation of the system. In general, the Supreme Court contemplates that the Division will be responsible for the cost of acquiring and installing the software in each county, for initial training in each county, for statewide system servers, for the communications network connecting the counties with each other and with state agencies, and for the ongoing costs of statewide systems’ software licenses and maintenance. In general, the Supreme Court contemplates that counties will be asked to bear or at least share the cost of local servers, if any, desktop computers and related equipment, data conversion, and local technological support. However, these allocations of financial responsibility are general contemplations and likely will vary according to the state fiscal resources available for this project and from county to county based on local needs and conditions.

4. Any county that elects, at its expense, to upgrade substantially an existing or acquire a new case management system other than the statewide case management system may do so only with the written permission of the Division. In general, the Supreme Court authorizes the Division to approve such an upgrade or acquisition if the Division is satisfied that the system being upgraded or acquired can be connected with the statewide case management system in a way that permits the secure sharing of information in both directions to a substantially similar extent as information is shared between counties within the statewide case management system. A condition of approval will be that an appropriate interface exists or will be provided at the requesting county's expense between the system being upgraded or acquired and the statewide case management system.

5. To further the sharing of court information, counties that elect to maintain their existing case management systems may be required by the Division to develop interfaces between their systems and the statewide case management system.

6. This policy also applies to city and town courts and to Marion County Small Claims Courts with such modifications as may be necessary given the nature of those courts.

7. The Supreme Court reserves the right to direct that a court or county install a case management system that has the communications and other features contemplated by this policy. However, barring exceptional circumstances, it will not direct any system be installed prior to July 1, 2006. No such direction will be given without at least two years' advance notice.

    The Clerk is directed to see that this policy statement is sent to West Publishing and Lexis/Nexis for publication in the advance sheets and bound volumes of reported decisions of this Court.

    Done at Indianapolis, Indiana this 13th day of May, 2002.

                        _____________________________
                        Randall T. Shepard
                        Chief Justice of Indiana

All Justices concur.