Access to Justice discussed in West Virginia

Good to read in the West Virginia State Journal that West Virginia Supreme Court officials are thinking about access to courthouse issues, especially for litigants of emotionally challenging issues like domestic violence, elder law, children's issues, and workers compensation, legal issues that often feature litigants not familiar with their rights.

The article in the Journal mentioned handicapped access discussed, since there are a lack of elevators, and thus access to courtrooms on floors other than the first. This is pretty crucial, as those with limited physical abilities are less likely to pursue their rights if it is physically impractical. In my experience, this problem arises less when litigants are already in the midst of litigation, and thus committed to see it through, but physical access affects witnesses' willingness to participate, and potential litigants' willingness to avail themselves of courthouse remedies.

I was pleased to read that the discussion got around to education for both courthouse personnel and the public. One of the most stressful experiences when pursuing one's rights is to go into a courthouse and have difficulty figuring out with whom to speak concerning one's rights and procedures. As a lawyer, I have been particularly shocked and the lack of willingness of many court personnel to give instructions concerning their court's own procedures. Not only am I directed to study the court's rules and interpret them myself, but the clerk's offices that I have seen generally do not have courtesy copies of the rulebooks displayed for use by the public. (Admittedly my experience is only in the Distict of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia. I make no comment about West Virginia.) Thus, courthouses could make their own procedures more accessible and could assure than all or most personnel are familiar with the procedures and rules of the court.

The article mentioned an idea floated by Supreme Court Administrative Director Steve Canterbury, namely, that every lawyer donate a certain number of hours to pro bono work, including legal aid -- and to fine attorneys failing to do this. If you read this blog regularly, you will find this suggestion has been floated about in a number diverse places, so I wouldn't be surprised if it becomes the norm in the next 25 years.

He also suggested making continuing legal education for attorneys willing to learn a new field for the purpose of helping those withou financial ability to pay for legal help. I notice that this practice is alive and well in Maryland, such as in programs that assist military personnel obtain wills.

The purpose of this blog entry, and others like it, is to advance and encourage the discussion of how courts and lawyers can make the justice system more readily available to those for whom access is somewhat limited. Thus, although this entry may appear to repeat ideas of some past entries, we should certainly be encouraged by the increased dialogue in increased numbers of locations.