The impact of bullying continues to be hot topic in the media, with an increase in attention to the phenomenon of “cyber-bullying.”  Recently, a Rutgers University student committed suicide after he was the victim of a high-tech cyber-bullying incident.  His roommate surreptitiously procured a video of the student having sex with another male student, and then streamed the video online.  The bullying victim jumped from the George Washington Bridge after posting his intent to do so on his own Facebook page.

Such cyber-bullying incidents are becoming more and more common as our youth become ever more tied into electronic media and online social networking sites.  At least one study has suggested that more than 40 percent of kids in this country admit having been bullied on the internet, and 35 percent say they have received online threats.  Another study reported that more than 20% of the kids who had been on the receiving end of bullying strongly considered committing suicide, and as many as 19% actually made some kind of suicide attempt.  Nearly one third reported committing acts which could be considered bullying in nature.  Approximately 20% admitted committing acts of cyber-bullying.

With such startling numbers, it is clear that parents and schools must be vigilant to the warning signs that bullying, even via the internet, texting, or social networks like Twitter, is occurring.  New Hampshire’s revised bullying statute that went into effect on July 1, 2010, now contains a definition of “cyber-bullying,” and obligates school officials to be on the lookout for it, and to act when there is evidence that it is occurring.  Unfortunately, the law does not contain a private enforcement mechanism permitting parents to hold schools accountable in court when they fail to meet the obligations placed on them by the new Act.  Hopefully the legislature will reconsider this omission in the near future.  Parents who are concerned should let their voices be heard at the State House.

Several attorneys filed suit against the State recently to try to obtain proper funding for our judicial system.  It is broken and I could not sit idly by and let it be gutted by excessive legislative budget cuts so I joined in as counsel.

Each year 230,000 court cases are filed in New Hampshire.

Certain types of court cases have specific time frames in which to act and those are set by the legislature.  For example, domestic violence cases and criminal cases require certain scheduling dates by law.  Thus, work on such cases means other cases must be delayed if judge time is lacking due to vacancies.  For instance, in 2009, there were 5,300 cases of domestic violence with hearings required between five or thirty days of filing, depending on the request.

Stalking cases were 1,470 in number, with the same time requirements.  9,600 landlord/tenant cases must be heard ten days from service of process.  Involuntary emergency admissions to the N.H. Hospital were filed 1,700 times last year and they must be heard within three days of hospitalization.

Families are also heavily affected by the lack of a judge to help decide their disputes.  7,200 juvenile cases, 10,000 new divorce or family petitions and 7,000 closed cases reopened for parenting or lack of child support issues were heard last year alone.

Judges cannot decide cases without someone processing them, scheduling them, getting orders out, and otherwise processing paperwork.  Each month thousands of orders have to go to the office of child support enforcement, various criminal law agencies, and to parties involved in marital and civil cases.

In the non-criminal area our State Constitution’s Bill of Rights (Part I, Article 14), says that everyone is entitled to a certain remedy for all injuries they may receive and that they are to obtain it “completely, and without any denial; promptly, and without delay.”

The purpose of that provision is to make civil remedies readily available and to guard against arbitrary denial of access to the courts.  It is an equal protection clause because, whether you are suing someone or being sued, you want to have your case resolved as soon as possible.

Last year there were $3.1 million of cuts out of a judicial branch budget of about $65 million, with another $2.2 million hit in May.  Concord District Court, which is a three-judge court, is now operating with one full-time judge.  Due to the reduction in personnel a form letter went out this summer canceling all civil trials.

Small claims cases were all cancelled in the Manchester District Court this summer for an indefinite period.

On July 22, Merrimack County Superior Court began closing to the public daily from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.  As of June 30, it had nearly 500 case files with pieces of mail that had yet to be docketed in the court record, with some documents dating back to March.  Another 150 trial and hearing notices had not been sent out and more than 350 files contained court orders that had not been issued.

And Hillsborough County just announced:

HILLSBOROUGH SUPERIOR COURT CLERKS TO CLOSE OFFICES

TUESDAY AND THURSDAY AFTERNOONS

Staff shortages prompt move to focus on reduction of case backlog

CONCORD, October 1 – The clerk’s office in Nashua for Hillsborough County Superior Court North and Hillsborough County Superior Court South will close at 1 p.m. on Tuesday and Thursday beginning October 5 to allow uninterrupted time for processing cases and related materials.

Both clerk’s offices, which had been closed from 8 a.m. to 9 a.m., will reopen at 8 a.m. daily, beginning Oct. 5 with implementation of the new Tuesday/Thursday afternoon closings.

After 1 p.m. on Tuesday and Thursday, no telephone or counter service will be available to lawyers, litigants or the public in the clerk’s office during those hours; the automated telephone system will be monitored so that emergency requests are addressed promptly. A “drop box” will be set up inside the courthouse at 30 Spring Street in Nashua for filing documents during the hours when the clerk’s office is closed.

As of today, the Merrimack County Superior Court, which had been closed down since last August on weekday afternoons to work on reducing the case backlog, will be open for a full day on Fridays. The clerk’s office in Concord remains closed to lawyers, litigants and the public Monday through Thursday from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. to allow for uninterrupted case processing.

Several other court locations statewide, faced with backlogs and staff shortages, also have limited public operating hours to allow uninterrupted time for employees to process cases.

Superior Court Chief Justice Robert J. Lynn said the schedule will be reviewed every 30 days to determine when the clerk’s office can return to routine office hours. Reductions in the court system budget have required administrators to maintain 71 full-time non-judicial vacancies, which means court locations have fewer employees on staff to carry out day to day clerical responsibilities.

These cutbacks affect all citizens who seek justice.  I will do all I can to fight for fair funding.  If you have a delay horror story, email me at info@nojustice.org

If you are contemplating a lawsuit, or perhaps just filed one, you have probably heard that the court requires the parties to “mediate” the case.  What is mediation, and is it something you want to take part in?

Mediation is a type of “alternative dispute resolution.”  Simply put, it is a formalized method by which you attempt to settle your lawsuit before going to trial.  It is often confused by lawpersons with arbitration, which is an alternative form of trial judges rather than an actual judge and jury.

How does a mediation work?  Typically the parties agree on a mediator as the first step.  The mediator is typically an attorney or retired judge.  The choice of mediator is very important.  An inexperienced or unmotivated mediator will not be effective in driving the mediation process to a successful resolution.  Experienced trial attorneys will know the right mediator for the case, and will insist on using the right mediator in your case.

Once the mediator is selected, the mediator process typically begins by having all the parties meet and their representatives meet in one room.  The lawyers for the parties typically give a presentation of what they believe the evidence will demonstrate at trial, and try to highlight the strengths of their case, and the weaknesses of the other side’s case.  It is not uncommon for the plaintiff to explain how the defendant’s conduct has personally impacted him or her, and also not uncommon for the mediator to ask questions of both sides to help clarify certain points and potentially to highlight key issues in the case which parties may not have fully appreciated before the medication begins.

At that point, the parties typically separate and go into different rooms.  It is at this point that the plaintiff makes a demand for a certain amount of money (which is typically much higher than what their attorney ahs told them to expect as an end result) and the defendant makes an offer to pay the plaintiff a certain amount (almost always much lower than what they actually expect to pay) of money to dismiss the case.  The mediator then goes back and forth between the rooms in a process of “shuttle diplomacy.”

During each visit with the mediator, the parties discuss the amount of their demand or offer the settle, and the strengths and weaknesses highlighted by the other side.  The goal is to keep reducing the plaintiff’s demand, and increasing the defendant’s offer, until they meet at some point.  If they meet, then the case is settled.  If the defendant is unwilling to pay the lowest amount the plaintiff is willing to accept to settle the case, then the mediation will end and the parties effectively pretend it never happened.

In a successful mediation, the parties decide the outcomes of the case, rather than allowing a third party to do it for them.  If the mediation fails, then the parties simply proceed to trial, and treat the mediation as if it never happened.  The jury never hears about what happened at the mediation.  Everything that happens at the mediation is kept strictly confidential, to encourage the parties to be open and honest about their case and make the best effort possible to resolve it.

Successful mediations depend tremendously on the skill and experience of the parties’ counsel and the mediator.  Picking the right mediator is crucial, but having the right attorney is even more important.  An experienced trial attorney will have the experience to value your case, and to make the most effective use of the mediation process to get the other side to pay the most money they are willing to offer, and not take the risk of undervaluing your case.

Considering that most cases settle before trial, and many of those settle in mediations, it is important to choose the right attorney to handle your case in order to ensure your case is worked to get you the full compensation you deserve.

Jerry Ray Bowen was a felon and probable gang member who apparently shot his sawed-off shotgun at his girlfriend’s car as she drove away following a violent break up. Not surprisingly, the police wanted to locate Bowen and his sawed-off shotgun.  The police had heard that Bowen “might be staying at his foster mother’s home,” and obtained a search warrant for her home and any weapons found there.

Augusta Millender, the foster mother, and other members of her family were home when the SWAT team arrived to execute the search warrant.  At 5:00 a.m. they were ordered to leave their home while the police searched for Bowen and his sawed-off shotgun, neither of which were found at the Millender home.  What police did find, however, was Ms. Millender’s own (not-sawed-off) shotgun, and a box of .45 caliber ammunition.  These items were seized.

Ms. Millender, who had been at home sleeping when the SWAT team burst through her front door, filed suit against the police for violating her Constitutional rights, specifically, her right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment.

Civil rights claims against police can be uphill battles, but in the right circumstances, the cases are definitely worth pursuing.  Often, the existence of a search warrant forecloses suit under the Fourth Amendment and allows the police to rely on “sovereign immunity” to avoid responsibility for their misconduct. In the Millender case, however, the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the police were not immune from suit because even though a judge signed the search warrant, the evidence that Bowen or his shotgun would be found in the Millender home was so scant that no reasonable officer should have believed that there was probable cause in the first place.

Victims of civil rights violations by police officers face a tough battle when they seek compensation from the government.  Pursuing these claims requires skill and experience.  At Douglas, Leonard & Garvey, we have brought cases against police officers and other governmental officials to protect our clients’ constitutional rights.