The Case for Digital Recording in Cook County
Injustice Watch did some great reporting on the consequences to self-represented people when there is no proper court record of their hearings—particularly in eviction court. Chicago Appleseed has been working with LAF, Cabrini Green Legal Aid, CARPLS, Center for Disability and Elder Law, Chicago Volunteer Legal Services, John Marshall Law School, Legal Aid Society of Metropolitan Chicago, Lawyers Committee for Better Housing, and the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law on this issue for several years. There is a substantial failure of justice in our courts where the appellate rights of litigants are denied for lack of recordkeeping and where the decisions of trial judges can never be reviewed for error.
In 2016, we issued a report on the matter. Our report noted that over the last 30 years, the evictions courts have gone from having a court reporter in every courtroom to rarely having any, with many private attorneys providing court reporters at their own expense for their cases only. Unfortunately, in the eviction courts, generally fewer than 5% of tenants have an attorney and only 53% of landlords do. The eviction courts are high volume courts in one of the largest unified court systems in the world—a court systems which sees 1.5 million new cases in a year.
Observational data provided by legal aid attorneys practicing in the eviction courts demonstrates significant differences in outcomes when parties are represented. Not only does court recording mitigate the differences in outcome—by providing a reminder that the decisions are subject to oversight and review—but it also facilitates review when it becomes necessary. In essence, digital recording improves equity in courts, even if the record is never transcribed and reviewed. Our partner in this effort, LAF, issued a statement detailing these concerns.
As noted in our report, digital recording is not only common in many jurisdictions, Cook County has implemented it in the domestic violence courthouse, the juvenile courthouse and the traffic court at the Daley Center. Our report examines three common staffing models, as well as types of technology, and estimates that systems could be employed at an average start-up cost between $5,000 and $7,000 per courtroom, at the low end, and under $15,000 at the high end.
We concluded that digital recording devices would adequately preserve the rights of persons in the courts. Court administrators must balance concerns of budget and staffing in creating fair and open courts, but their primary concern must always be to ensure competent and equitable decisionmaking by judges. Where no court records are made, there is no assurance of justice.
Initial conversations with the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts and the Office of the Chief Judge of Cook County were encouraging and appeared to demonstrate agreement that the equipment was badly needed. However, by late 2017, there had been no action made toward implementation. Therefore, on October 18, 2017, we and our collaboration partners sent a letter to Chief Judge Evans asking whether progress had been made and offering to assist.
In the Injustice Watch article, a representative from the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts stated that the recording equipment would be purchased by June 30, 2018, but did not provide a timetable for when the court recording would begin. This injustice has been occurring for far too long already. We ask that a timetable for implementation of court recording in the eviction courts be announced. The time for action is now.
Our work in this area has been supported by a constitutionality analysis conducted by pro bono attorneys at DLA Piper and through the work of our Access to Justice Committee.