The requirement of timely case processing applies to trial, pretrial, and posttrial events. The court must control the time from civil case filing or criminal arrest to trial or other final disposition. Early and continuous control establishes judicial responsibility for timely disposition, identifies cases that can be settled, eliminates delay, and ensures that matters will be heard when scheduled. Court control of the trial itself will reduce delay and inconvenience to the parties, witnesses, and jurors. During and following a trial, the court must make decisions in a timely manner. Finally, ancillary and postjudgment or postdecree matters need to be handled expeditiously to minimize uncertainty and inconvenience.

In addition to requiring courts to comply with nationally recognized guidelines for timely case processing, Standard 2.1 urges courts to manage their caseloads to avoid backlog. This may be accomplished, for example, by terminating inactive cases and resolving as many cases as are filed.

Measurement Overview. Four measures are associated with Standard 2.1. These measures require using court records and management information to determine the court’s compliance with case processing time standards and whether it is keeping up with its incoming caseload. The degree to which needed information is retrievable will affect the time, personnel, and financial commitments required to complete the evaluations. Some of the measures may be undertaken by court staff; others may require the aid of an outside department or agency to assist with analysis of the data and the interpretation of the results.

Measure 2.1.1 evaluates timely case processing from case filing to disposition. Based on a large sample of cases, processing times are calculated by measuring the time between filing and disposition for each case. By comparing its own processing times with recommended standards, the court examines how closely it approximates the standards.

Measure 2.1.2 assesses how well a court is keeping up with incoming cases. Failure to keep up with the incoming caseload increases the pending caseload. An examination of the court’s clearance rates (the ratio of disposed to filed cases) over several years will identify trends in reducing or increasing the pending caseload.

Measure 2.1.3 looks at all cases awaiting disposition and determines what percentage of those cases represent a backlog. Pending cases are ranked by age and compared to case processing time standards. The percentage of cases exceeding the standards indicates the size of the court’s backlog.

Measure 2.1.4 evaluates the extent to which cases are heard when scheduled. Based on court records that indicate the number of trial settings, patterns of continuances in the court can be determined.

All measures should be used to obtain the most complete picture of how well a court performs with respect to the timeliness of its case processing activities. However, if available time and resources do not permit use of all measures, Measures 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 should be given priority. If the court is in compliance with local or State disposition time standards and there is no evidence of an emerging backlog, court staff might choose to omit Measures 2.1.3 and 2.1.4.

This measure provides information regarding the time it takes to process cases. It compares the court’s processing times to local, State, or national standards, and evaluates the degree of compliance with these standards. The court’s case processing time is calculated from case processing information collected from a random sample of cases disposed of during the preceding year.

Planning/Preparation. This measure requires careful coordination and supervision. The investment in time and money required for completion depends to a large extent on the court’s recordkeeping system. Courts with automated systems may be able to provide much of the necessary data from computer printouts. Courts with manual recordkeeping systems may need to hire, train, and supervise individuals to collect data from case files. In either case, data need to be gathered and analyzed.

The first task is to identify general case categories. At a minimum, the court should measure felony and general civil case dispositions. Misdemeanor, domestic relations, juvenile, or other specialized case types may also be measured using the same methodology. However, because these types of cases may fall within the jurisdiction of limited or special jurisdiction courts, they are not referred to specifically in this discussion.

A felony case is one in which a formal indictment, information, or accusation is filed against a defendant on any charge (or charges) defined as a felony by State law. Count all charges in one indictment against one defendant as one case. Count a case charged as a felony in the indictment or information as a felony case for sampling purposes, even if the defendant is convicted of a misdemeanor. Do not count probation violation alone as a felony case.

A civil case is any action under civil law other than probate, domestic relations, and small claims. Other cases that should be excluded from the civil case sample include appeals from lower courts or administrative agencies, petitions for amendment of orders or decrees, and any case type that is nonlitigious in nature (e.g., name changes, registration of foreign judgments, and transcripts of judgments).

The second task is to compile a list of all cases of each type to be examined that were disposed of in the prior reporting period. (This measure is designed to correspond to the court’s yearly reporting cycle. In many cases this will be a calendar year, but some courts operate on a July 1 to June 30 reporting cycle.) The cases should be identified by docket number and, if possible, by case caption.

Disposition in felony cases is defined as the date on which a diversion, judgment of guilt (guilty plea entered or verdict) or acquittal, nolle prosequi, or dismissal of the case is entered regarding all (or the last of) the charges against the defendant. For cases in which adjudication is formally withheld in anticipation of dismissal (a type of diversion), the date on which adjudication is formally withheld (the beginning of the diversion period) should be considered the disposition date. Ideally, data collectors should subtract the amount of time that a defendant was unavailable because he failed to appear, resulting in the issuance of a bench warrant or capias. Subtract the time from issuance of the bench warrant to his subsequent rearrest.

In civil cases not concluded by trial, a case is disposed of when a final order is entered from a default or summary judgment, entry of settlement, voluntary dismissal, or dismissal for lack of prosecution. In cases concluded by trial, the date the verdict or judgment was entered can be considered the disposition date. If a trial verdict is appealed and remanded to the trial court, the case should be considered "reopened" for purposes of determining case processing time (i.e., count from the date of the remand to disposition). The following types of dispositions should be excluded: transfer or removal to another jurisdiction, interlocutory appeal, and a stay (e.g., pending bankruptcy).

The next step is to select the samples of cases. If the court’s automated information system can identify the case types targeted for examination and can produce a list of random numbers, docket numbers can be selected electronically. If the automated system does not have this capability or the system is manual, an interval sample (e.g., every fifth case) must be selected manually.

To determine sample size, the following guide for each case type (civil, criminal, etc.) should be used:

            Total Dispositions for the Year             Minimum Sample Size

                            1,000                                              280
                            2,000                                              325
                            3,000                                              345
                            5,000                                              360
                           10,000                                              380

These sample sizes should provide a sampling error of ±5 percent in 95 percent of all samples.¹ Expect to reject some sampled cases because they are not the targeted case or disposition types or because key data are missing. Thus, the initial sample should include about 10 percent more cases than the required minimum sample size.

After the samples have been drawn, prepare the data collection forms. Forms 2.1.1a and 2.1.1c are generic data collection forms for civil and criminal cases, respectively. Forms 2.1.1b and 2.1.1d are sample civil and criminal case code sheets. Items on these forms may require modification to reflect the terminology used in the jurisdiction (e.g., felony entries referring to "information or indictment" may need to be changed to "accusation or true bill"). The generic data collection forms capture the basic information needed to identify cases and to calculate overall case disposition time as well as time periods for intermediate case processing events. Items with an asterisk are those required to calculate the time from case filing to disposition. Additional data elements on the forms will give the court a more refined picture of its case processing situation. To examine other factors influencing timeliness in case processing, additional data elements can be added to the forms (e.g., the number of plaintiffs or defendants, the criminal defendant’s custody status, and the number of days in trial).

Before data collection begins, prepare a coding manual to guide data collectors and assure that data recording is consistent among cases and coders. For each item on the coding sheet, the manual should describe what information is to be collected, where it can be found in the data source (e.g., computer printout, case file, docket sheet) and how it is to be recorded. Before data collection begins, review this information with the data collectors.

Data Collection. During this step, data collectors record the appropriate case information on the data collection forms. If the data collectors use a computer printout with all the necessary data, this process may average as little as 3 or 4 minutes per case. If manual case files must be retrieved and reviewed to acquire the necessary information, data collection may average as much as 15 minutes per case.

A court must regularly monitor whether it is keeping up with its incoming caseload. A key indicator of court performance on this issue is the disposition or clearance ratio: the number of cases that are disposed in a given year divided by the number of filings in the same year for identifiable case types. Courts should aspire to dispose at least as many cases as are filed each year (i.e., it should have a clearance ratio of 1.0 or higher). If the court is disposing of fewer cases than are filed each year, a growing backlog is inevitable. Knowledge of clearance ratios for various case categories over a period of 3 to 5 years can help to pinpoint emerging problems and where improvements must be made.

Planning/Preparation. This measure requires information on the numbers of cases filed and disposed each year. It is most valuable to courts if data are available for particular case types for at least 5 years.

Data Collection. The data required for this measure should be available from the clerk’s office or court manager’s records.

Data Analysis and Report Preparation. For each case type, divide the number of cases disposed of by the number of cases filed. The resulting ratios represent the court’s annual clearance rates for those case types. (Form 2.1.2, Ratio of Dispositions to Filings Worksheet, can be used as a guide for calculating the ratios.) Compute the same calculation for the court’s total caseload.

Display the data in a graph showing the clearance rates for both individual case types and the court’s total caseload over a 5-year period (see Form 2.1.2). If a court is keeping up with its incoming caseload, all the ratios on the graph will be close to 1.0. A court that is not keeping up with its incoming caseload will plot values less than 1.0, indicating that a backlog is developing or that an existing backlog is increasing.

This measure is designed to evaluate the age of cases awaiting disposition in order to establish whether a backlog exists and, if so, to determine its magnitude.

Planning/Preparation. To determine the source of data for this measure, court personnel should identify the best source for information on the total number of cases pending by designated case types (e.g., docket sheets, case files) as well as the means for determining the filing dates for each case so that the age of particular cases can be calculated. The degree to which case type data are kept by the court will determine the number of categories to be measured (e.g., some courts may track only general civil data while others may track specific categories such as tort, contract, and property).

Data Collection. The first task is to compile a list of all pending cases for each case type to be measured. This list should include, at a minimum, the case number and the filing date. Next, arrange the cases according to their filing dates, beginning with the oldest pending case. This arrangement will permit the determination of how many cases fall within specified age categories (e.g., the number of civil cases pending 360 days or more, the number of cases pending 180 days or more). Form 2.1.3, Display Tables—Age of Pending Caseload, can be used as a guide to create tables showing the age of cases in 60-day intervals for civil cases and 30-day intervals for criminal cases. Most courts with automated case records can obtain the necessary data with the help of a programmer. Courts with only manual case records have found data collection to be difficult. A court that has a large number of pending cases and inadequate case record automation might select a sample of pending cases for purposes of this analysis (see the planning/preparation section for Measure 2.1.1).

This measure evaluates the frequency with which cases scheduled for trial are heard when scheduled. Research has shown that a higher proportion of jury trials that start on the first scheduled trial date is correlated with a more expeditious pace of litigation.²

Planning/Preparation. Through interviews with the court manager, gather information on trial settings in individual cases. The most convenient and accurate source for collecting data on the number of times specific cases have been set for trial will vary from court to court (e.g., docket sheets, case summary screens in automated systems, case control cards, case files).

Jury trials are of particular interest because they require a greater expenditure of resources and impose a greater burden on local citizens (jurors) than do bench trials. Evaluating the degree of jury trial date certainty, therefore, should be given a somewhat higher priority. Ideally, however, the court should evaluate trial date certainty for both bench and jury trials. (Note: A hearing on a motion for summary judgment should not be counted as a bench trial; nor should a default or show cause hearing be counted as a bench trial.) A bench trial is defined as a hearing at which the parties contest the facts in the case and present evidence before a judge in open court and at which the judge renders a decision that disposes of the case. (Note: a summary judgment hearing is not a bench trial because the parties agree on the facts; appropriate application or interpretation of the law is the only issue at a summary judgment hearing.)

Data Collection. All cases disposed during or at the conclusion of a bench or jury trial for each case category during the previous year should be identified through automated or manual case records. If automated case records cannot identify bench or jury trial verdicts, the jury commissioner and courtroom clerks might retain records that could help identify trial cases. If current records allow you to identify only cases that started trial or that had a verdict entered (one or the other), your list will be sufficient for determining trial date certainty.

Sampling. Select separate samples of bench and jury trials. For each type of trial, if there were fewer than 100, obtain data on all trial cases. If the number of trials substantially exceeds 100, randomly sample at least 100 cases or 25 percent of all trials, whichever number is larger. (See also the planning/preparation section for Measure 2.1.1, Time to Disposition, which includes a table for determining sample size.) An interval sample (e.g., selecting every third case) can also be used. Most courts, therefore, will have to collect data on 100 or fewer jury trials and 100 or fewer bench trials for civil cases and about the same numbers of bench and jury trials in criminal cases (or whatever case types you examine). Page 1 of Form 2.1.4a, Civil Jury Trial Settings—Data Collection Form, could be used to collect data on the issue of civil jury or bench trial date certainty. The form can be modified to collect data on any type of trial for civil or criminal cases (simply change the title of the form; for criminal cases you will change item (B) to "Defendant Name"). To simplify data collection, "Number of Trial Settings" could be added as a data item to the form.