The Washington Supreme Court is asking the Legislature to approve a $90 surcharge on a court filing fee to help provide legal help for the poor in civil cases, Chief Justice Gerry Alexander said Wednesday. "Some might say, why should we support this when we face tough financial times?" Alexander asked in his State of the Judiciary address to a joint session of the Legislature. "It seems to me in America, where we rejoice in the fact that we are a nation devoted to the rule of law, we should not ration access to justice." The recommendation comes from the court's Task Force on Civil Equal Justice Funding, created in 2001 to look for ways to cope with the sparse amount of money available for such cases. As the task force was studying the issue, $900,000 was cut from state support for civil equal justice services. That prompted the state's two main legal services providers - Columbia Legal Services and Northwest Justice Project - to cut their staffs, Alexander said. The change would increase the cost of filing a lawsuit in Superior Court to $200. The total fee would be split, with 54 percent going to counties and 46 percent going to the state for a newly created equal justice account. Alexander also requested money for five additional Superior Court judgeships and one additional District Court judgeships, arguing that increased caseloads require more judges. Two of the Superior Court judges and the District Court judge would be in Clark County, with one Superior Court judge added in the joint district that serves Benton and Franklin counties and one each in Kittitas and Kitsap counties. 

Question: "What is the motive of the Washington Supreme Court in asking the Legislature to approve a $90 surcharge on a court filing fee?"

Response: "Support Poor People"

A: yes


When single father Thurman Williams needed help filling out papers in a custody suit recently, he didn't look to his lawyer for help. He walked to a computerized kiosk at the Lamoreaux Justice Center in Orange and started tapping the keys. As part of a legal experiment, litigants without lawyers across California are using computerized video kiosks to prepare common court filings and seek basic legal advice. The kiosk used by Williams is part of a statewide effort to cope with a flood of litigants who cannot afford or refuse to hire lawyers. Court officials statewide fear the number of self-represented litigants has reached crisis levels and threatens to clog court calendars. Like Williams, more than 6,000 Orange County litigants have initiated court actions on I-CAN! kiosks or accessed the programs on the Internet, using home computers. Similar programs are operating in Sacramento, San Diego and Ventura. A recent study of the kiosks' first 18 months of operation concluded it is too soon to tell if the system will relieve pressure on court calendars. But the report, by UC Irvine's School of Social Ecology, said users were overwhelmingly positive about the free legal assistance. "It's made life a lot easier for me," Williams said. "It's helped keep me from going to the poorhouse." The 29-year-old Orange resident was directed to a kiosk in the Lamoreaux Justice Center by court staff. After putting on headphones and following the directions of a videotaped instructor, Williams filled out a quarter-inch stack of paternity and custody documents. The exercise took 20 minutes; it would have cost him about $800 if he had relied on a lawyer, he said. "It was a lot easier than I thought." Whether they can't afford a lawyer or just want to save money, more Californians are going to court without a lawyer. "I'm just amazed at the numbers," said Commissioner Salvador Sarmiento, who hears between 40 and 90 child-support cases a day in Lamoreaux Justice Center. 

Question: "Why did Thurman Williams walk to a computerized kiosk at the Lamoreaux Justice Center in Orange and just start tapping keys, as oppose to finding a lawyer?"

Response: "As part of a legal experiment, litigants without lawyers across California were using computerized video kiosks to prepare court filings and seek legal advice"

A: yes


Shelly wanted a puppy. She asked her mommy and daddy every day for one. She told them that she would help take care of the puppy, if she could have one. Her mommy and daddy talked it over and said that they would get Shelly a new puppy. Her mommy took her to the dog pound so that she could choose one that she wanted. All the puppies at the dog pound need a loving home. Shelly went to every cage and looked each puppy in the eyes and talked to each one. After each one, she told her mommy, "No, this isn't the one for me." Finally, she saw a black and white spotted one that she fell in love with. She screamed, "Mommy, this is the one!" Her mommy asked the worker to take the puppy out so that Shelly could make sure. Shelly and the puppy fell in love with each other right away. Shelly and her mommy took the black and white spotted puppy home with them. Shelly was so excited that she talked all the way home. After thinking hard, Shelly had a name for her new puppy, Spot. Now, Shelly has a new best friend and they play together every day when Shelly gets home from school. 

Question: "What did Shelly say when she found a puppy she liked?"

Response: "Mommy, this is the one!"

A:
no