Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Judiciary Operations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Judiciary outlines statewide court structure, electronic filing and new judges to House committee
Summary
Chief superior judge and court administrators briefed the House Judiciary Committee on Jan. 10 about the unified superior court structure, retention and nominating processes, electronic case management, remote hearings and the operational effect of recently funded judges.
Chief Superior Judge Tom Zoney and court administrators appeared before the House Judiciary Committee on Jan. 10 to review how Vermont’s court system is structured and to describe recent operational changes the judiciary says affect capacity and case disposition.
Zoney said the superior court is statewide and organized into 14 units that roughly correspond to counties; each unit typically has four divisions — criminal, family (including juvenile), civil and probate. He described the judicial nominating board process for appointing trial judges and the retention process used at six-year intervals.
The judiciary briefed the committee on two operational changes it said have improved capacity: the adoption of statewide electronic filing and case management systems and the extension of remote-hearing technology. Officials said electronic files make it easier to run data queries on case types (for example, competency findings) and remote hearings expanded participation for witnesses and parties who cannot travel.
Zoney and court staff noted that three recently funded judicial positions were filled and will begin operating after orientation; the judiciary expects the additional judges to increase trial days and clearance rates in counties that receive the new positions. The judiciary said newly appointed judges will be phased into trial dockets to ensure they can begin handling cases effectively.
On the subject of legislative consultation, Zoney reminded members that the judiciary cannot offer advisory opinions on constitutionality or tell the Legislature what to adopt, but can explain operational impacts of proposals and suggest drafting language to reduce inadvertent consequences. “I can’t answer that. It’s not appropriate for the court to give advisory opinions,” he said.
Court staff invited legislators to observe hearings in local courthouses and said they will provide the committee with data requested for an upcoming joint hearing on case disposition and public-safety timelines.
The judiciary also described the retention process (public surveys, a retention committee and legislative review), and noted that probate judges and assistant judges remain elected county officials with limited roles in civil dockets.
