Scanners Anyone?
The Sea Coast Echo reports that the appellate record has gone missing in an appeal involving the incorporation of Diamondhead, which is a community in Hancock County near I-10. The Supreme Court is unhappy:
Justice Jess Dickinson issued an order Wednesday demanding that each attorney representing the Diamondhead incorporation opponents file a memorandum explaining why they failed to comply with the Mississippi Rules of Appellant Procedure.
My favorite part of the article is this nugget:
Attorney William Kulick said he vaguely remembers boxes of records, but he does not know what happened to them.
"I mailed them to my clients in Jackson," he said at the hearing. "I assumed they complied with the rules.
I sure hope that by “mailed” he means something with a tracking number, or the buck will probably stop before Jackson.
But should the Supreme Court still be using 20th Century techniques for compiling and allowing attorneys to review appeals records? I can understand why in 1990 the lower court clerk compiled the record and mailed it to the Supreme Court clerk who then allowed the attorneys to check out the record and review it. But do they still do it that way in 2010? How quaint.
I remember working on an appeal around ten years ago while I was still at Baker Donelson. As is customary, we checked the appeal record out from the court clerk. The record had so many volumes that it had its own cart for wheeling it around the office. You could literally hear the record coming.
You would think that in this day and age the record would be scanned and disk(s) mailed to the parties' attorneys. A scanned record would be more convenient for the lawyers and the Court. I haven't had an appeal in a while so maybe it is now done this way. If not, it should be.
Update (12-23-10 10:45 a.m.): The record is no longer missing and is back in the chancery clerk's office.
Given the judiciary's limited budget, I doubt they could do this.
The problem won't be solved until the trial courts are all-ECF; then, I guess, some procedure can be devised for electronic transmission of the record to the appellate courts' clerk.
The differences in technology between counties here in Mississippi is simply staggering. I practice in one county where pleadings are scanned and can be pulled up in a few seconds. A county or two away, however, they are still using just ledgers and pens to keep track of cases and it's not unusual for the clerk's office to take 15 minutes or more to pull up a pleading.
There neda to be standardization in technology between the courts, and the slow move to statewide electronic filing is a step in the right direction. Ultimately, it all comes down to money, which means the poorer counties will always lag behind.
The Supreme Court already requires the Briefs on disc. It would be a simple matter to require the Appellant to submit the Record scanned on disc. Since Hurricane Katrina, we scan everything, so when we receive the Appeal Record, we scan it and work from the scanned copy. It does not cost much. If either Appellant or Appellee's lawyer doesn't have a scanner then the cost to have it scanned is very reasonable.
It would be a simple matter to require the Appellant to submit the Record scanned on disc.
Which requires the appellant to check out the record, which kinda defeats the purpose?
I had your thought at first, but it has that little catch. And who's going to trust "the other side" to scan the record?
I would trust the vast majority of opposing counsel who I have dealt with over the past few years to submit the complete record. In my experience, making sure that the record is complete for an appeal has been a very cooperative process.
"I would trust the vast majority of opposing counsel who I have dealt with over the past few years to submit the complete record."
Trust but verify, as Reagan said.