State of the Judiciary Address

CHIEF JUSTICE RABNER: Thank you and good morning, everyone. Rick, congratulations on your installation as president last night; Chief Judge Brown; colleagues in the Judiciary and in the Bar.

I’m very pleased to be here again to have an opportunity to speak with you about the state of our Judiciary. I’d like to start with a brief discussion about the relationship between the Judiciary and the Bar, because of the important effect that has on our court system and because there’s no better place to discuss that than at an annual meeting of the State Bar Association.

What an impressive meeting and convention this has been. Attendance is stronger than ever. The classes that you’ve all had an opportunity to read about or attend cover a broad spectrum of issues. They’ve been led by excellent moderators and panelists.

I am only sorry that I missed yesterday’s seminar, yesterday’s session on the Supreme Court. It was billed as a discussion by past and present justices to cover “what the court does and how it does it.”

I’ve been telling my wife for almost three years what a long and steep learning curve this job has. Who knew that in ninety minutes you could learn all of that, and that if you were willing to shell out an additional eight bucks, you could get CLE credit in Pennsylvania? If you offer that class again -- where’s Sue Feeney -- if you offer that class again, I will not make the same mistake of missing it.

And by the way, I couldn’t help but notice that this session is one of the few for which there appear to be no CLE credits available. That raised a question for me as to why you were here at 9 a.m., and then I figured it out. This is the only session scheduled in this time slot. Regardless of why you’ve decided to show up, I’m grateful that you’ve made time to attend.

The partnership that exists between the Bar and the Judiciary is healthy, strong and important. We may not always agree on legal issues that come before the Court, but we strive to work together on a variety of projects to improve the legal community and to help better serve the people of our State.

Let’s take, for example, the Continuing Legal Education requirement that is now upon us this year. It came about after a long period of study by a large committee that included many practitioners whose legal practices covered the full spectrum within our State. CLE was intended to be meaningful and user friendly. So we listened with care when the Bar asked, for example, whether lawyers could self report their compliance and submit a certification instead of going through the more onerous reporting obligations that other states have. We also listened when you said that you hoped this would be an opportunity for county and state Bars to be able to run accredited courses for their members, and this seminar is an excellent example of what that means in reality.

The convention is also an opportunity to develop and allow new relationships to grow. A few months ago, Justice LaVecchia asked whether it would be a good idea if we could arrange for law clerks to attend the Bar Association’s convention to get CLE credits at a reasonable price and gain an introduction to the legal community. I reached out to a number of leaders of the Bar and had some very positive conversations. We’ve seen the results these last few days. As of last Friday, 282 law clerks had signed up, and with some walk-ins, the number is about 300. I hope it’s the start of a new tradition and perhaps one that can be extended to federal law clerks, as well. It has been a great success all around.

Other aspects of the relationship, the partnership, provide a direct benefit to the public -- like the impressive increase in volunteerism over the course of this last year. That came about in part as a reaction to the frightening and staggeringly high numbers of mortgage foreclosure filings, which now average more than 5,000 a month in our State, more than 60,000 for this year, we project.

In response, as you know, New Jersey initiated the first statewide mandatory mediation program in the nation. As part of the program, we asked for volunteers to serve as mediators -- to sit at the table with borrowers and lenders to try to ensure that their discussions are productive and not just pro forma.

Within the first few months of announcing the program, 800 lawyers raised their hand to volunteer to serve as mediators at sessions that are required in all contested foreclosure filings. To date in the sixteen months since the program began in January of 2009, we have had 7700 sessions scheduled, and they’ve resulted in acceptable workouts to stave off foreclosures in more than 1300 cases. That’s 1300 instances where homeowners have been able to stay in their homes, where lenders have performing loans on their balance sheets.

We’ve seen other meaningful results in a variety of mediation and arbitration programs in our courts, which all benefit from the participation of so many fine attorneys. It’s timely to talk about this today. Last night, the State Bar installed its first ADR professional as president.

There are 700 trained and active mediators who work in two programs with our civil courts: the Statewide Civil Mediation Program, where the court can refer individual cases on it own motion or at the request of the parties -- and there were some 500 referrals in that area last year -- and the Presumptive Mediation Program that addresses twelve specific civil case types. There were some 7500 referrals in that program last year, of which roughly 1500 were resolved through mediation.

In addition, there are 1200 attorneys who conduct sessions for the mandatory Auto Arbitration Program and the mandatory Personal Injury Arbitration Program. Those combined programs had 30,000 referrals in 2009, two-thirds of which were resolved through arbitration. And we have 1100 attorneys that work with our Family Part on the Matrimonial Early Settlement Panels and the Economic Mediation Program. There were 16,000 referrals in those areas last year, of which the majority were resolved through mediation or soon after.

These programs all show how the judiciary is stronger today because of the assistance and volunteerism of members of the Bar. That’s especially helpful in difficult economic times, with fewer resources than ever in recent history.

With that in mind, let’s talk briefly about the Judiciary’s budget. As you all know, the state is in the midst of extraordinarily difficult economic times, and we in the Judiciary must do our share in that regard. For the last two years, we were asked to meet a combined shortfall of roughly $75 million. We met that with a loss of 470 positions, which is not surprising for a branch of government whose outlay is devoted so heavily toward salaries. We also deferred IT -- information technology -– expenses, moving in the opposite direction of where we need to go, but we had no choice.

In the coming year, as things stand, the Judiciary will be facing an additional shortfall of nearly $40 million. Once again, we expect a reduction in staff of about seventy positions, deferral, reluctantly one again, of IT expenditures, as well as some other adjustments.

Judge Grant and his team have been working on these issues, working with judges and staff and exploring ideas for additional cost savings. As we do so, I am confident that we will meet the short-term fiscal needs that are upon us and also continue to meet the needs of lawyers and litigants in our State. That is thanks to our extraordinary staff who are devoted, who care deeply about the work they do, and go above and beyond what their job descriptions set out. 

That’s also due to the work of our judges, the exemplary -- the extraordinary work of our judges both on and off the bench. Judges and staff help us get through the more than 1.1 million filings that we expect in New Jersey this year with a perhaps inevitable, but modest, increase in backlog as a result of a reduction in resources. I thank them not only for their talent, but for their dedication and commitment to the administration of justice.

Two examples of that commitment are initiatives we have undertaken without spending a great deal of money, but which have yielded tremendous benefits for individuals.

First, the Veteran’s Initiative, which we talked about a little bit last year. It began as a pilot program in Atlantic and Union Counties and has now spread to ten vicinages in our State. It was designed to identify veterans who have sacrificed for our nation and later found themselves in the criminal justice system, as defendants in municipal and superior courts, after their return.

We not only identify them, but look to refer them for existing services that are provided by third party agencies, whether treatment, counseling, or benefits, and we seek to match each defendant with a mentor, an active or retired veteran, by working closely with the Department of Military and Veteran Affairs.

The project developed as we were expecting the return of thousands of members of the National Guard in New Jersey, returning from deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan. We acted because we know historically that soldiers sometimes have difficulty readjusting to civilian life on their return and may end up in trouble with the law. This year the project expanded, as I mentioned, from Atlantic and Union Counties to Burlington and Cape May, Morris, Sussex, Mercer, Passaic, Bergen and Camden; and I know that the list will expand in the year ahead as well.

To date, thanks to the work of our staff and judges, we have had referrals in more than 250 cases. Our goal, our hope is to see real improvements in the lives of those individuals so that after their pending criminal case is resolved, we don’t see them a second time in our criminal court system.

One more example of the extraordinary commitment of members of the Judiciary this past year was on display during the Fugitive Safe Surrender Program in Newark last November. That project is coordinated by the U.S. Marshals Service and, before the program in Newark covering Essex and Union Counties, it had been done in seventeen cities nationwide in recent years.

In four days, 4200 fugitives surrendered at a church in Newark, surrendered peacefully. This was the second largest turnout in the history of the program.

They were processed in hearings before judges in a nearby building unaffiliated with the church, and many were given vouchers to come back to court. In total, about 4400 warrants were cleared, including 361 felony warrants. The project, to be sure, was done with the cooperation of the public defender’s office, the prosecutor’s office, community groups, and the Marshals Service. But it simply would not have happened without the remarkable efforts of our judges and staff in Essex and Union Counties who worked until eleven o’clock regularly to ensure that things worked smoothly. I’m so grateful for their efforts in making such a shining example in the history of the program.

The Judiciary must and will continue to live up to our responsibilities to serve the public -- not only in connection with the more than 1.1 million filings in our State, but also by creatively addressing needs as they arise. And we must do so in hard times, to borrow the language of the day, by finding ways to do more with less, as we have done.

Along those lines, let me broach one other subject, the municipal court system in our state. Our municipal courts, as you know, are the face of the Judiciary for so many people. They handled 6.3 million cases last year, and that’s a remarkable number when you consider that New Jersey’s population is 8.7 million. Cases were heard in 530 municipal courts. That’s 530 municipal courts in a State that has 566 municipalities.

You can tell from the numbers that there are some shared and joint courts where neighboring towns have banded together and are sharing courtroom space, judges, prosecutors and staff. But far more, hundreds more, have chosen to proceed as separate, freestanding municipal courts that serve communities of 75,000 people, 16,000, 9,000 and fewer.

Why is that? History, practice and custom, of course, have a lot to do with it. And many communities are very pleased with the fine service that they receive from judges and staff who have been in place for a long time. There’s also a concern about revenues, an understandable concern. Town A, for example, wants to make sure that the revenues from motor vehicle violations, fees, and other fines which originated within Town A are not shared with Town B, if they end up consolidating.

The reality for shared and joint courts is that with proper bookkeeping and accounting systems, which we have, operating costs can be divided by whatever arrangements the towns agree upon up front, and revenues can be divided based on the town of origin, so that those individual fines and fees will go back to Town A -- to the town where the violation occurred.

Before the 1947 Constitution, our court system existed of seventeen overlapping courts. It was costly. It was inefficient. The system was streamlined to the five courts that we have in operation today: the municipal courts, the superior court at the trial and appellate levels, tax court and the Supreme Court.

Today, in 2010, our system can be streamlined further to achieve greater efficiencies and greater cost savings in local communities -- by working on consolidating our municipal courts and at the same time maintaining a premium on fairness, justice, and excellence.

The Judiciary stands ready and willing to work with any towns that may have an interest in this regard. We’ve done so with the dozens of courts that exist. All that’s needed is to send a letter or an e-mail, or make a phone call, to me, Judge Grant, or any of the Assignment Judges -- and there are many who are here this morning. Those Assignment Judges will work closely with the courts in their vicinages and look to find the right fit for that area of our State.

Let me add a few words about a particular municipal court judge who served in Washington Township from 1973 to 1981. He was appointed to the Superior Court bench in 1984 where he served as a trial judge for eight years and then on the Appellate Division for 11 years, before he was appointed to serve as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court in 2003. I’m speaking, of course, of the Honorable John Wallace, who is with us here this morning. (Applause)

CHIEF JUSTICE RABNER: Let me tell you as an aside, John Wallace can be very persuasive in conference. You probably couldn’t see, but for the last minute, he’s been grabbing Justice Albin’s hand trying to make him sit down, with absolutely no success.

Justice Wallace brought all of this experience and then some when he ascended the bench. Indeed he brought a lifetime of commitment to public service: Captain in the United States Army, legendary coach of the Little League team and volunteer coach on the football coaching staff of Washington Township High School, vice chair of Gloucester County College’s Board of Trustees, member of the New Jersey Ethics Commission, member of the Supreme Court’s Committee on Minority Concerns, chair of its Ad Hoc Committee on Admissions, and the list goes on and on.

He also brought a sense of devotion to family -– to his wife Barbara, their five children, and grandchildren. Justice Wallace’s service to the court was grounded by all of those things, marked by scholarship that appears in the body of work and the opinions that he leaves behind, which speak for themselves, by a deep sense of respect for litigants, by the wisdom that he consistently displayed in his handling of challenging issues that came before him as a judge and a justice, and anchored at all times by a sense of grace with his hallmark smile and touch of humor. His civility is but one part of a life of integrity and character that have made him a role model for so many.

Justice Wallace was not only a role model for the hundreds of municipal court judges that we spoke about, but a colleague, a friend, and a source of inspiration for the legal community as a whole. It’s fitting to pause today to celebrate him and express our gratitude for all that he has done in serving the public with distinction for decades. (Applause)

CHIEF JUSTICE RABNER: I hope you enjoy the rest of the conference. If you have any suggestions, ideas, or constructive comments, please share them with Judge Grant and me. Send a letter. E-mail is the easiest way to reach me. 

I thank you very much for the opportunity to address you this morning. Thanks, everyone.