Synopsis of 5/25/2010 Article in Daily Journal
In an article titled, "Judges And Administrators Sparring," Amy Yarbrough, Daily Journal reporter, described the "battle between a group of California judges and state court administrators" as "heating up again this week, this time over Sacramento Superior Court's plans for the new statewide computer case management system." Yarbrough references the letter "fired off" by the Alliance of California Judges advising the Judicial Council that it had no legal authority to prevent Sacramento Court from its plan to set up its own server to host the California Case Management System. The ACJ letter alleges that the Judicial Council is overstepping its bounds. "The Judicial Council does not govern the trial courts. The Judicial Council's grant of constitutional authority is limited," the ACJ Director's wrote in their letter. The Alliance contends that, "The statutory and constitutional scheme for the Judiciary provide for a system of divided sovereignty, cooperation, and mutual assent between the Judicial Council and the trial courts." In a May 11 letter to Sacramento Presiding Judge Steve White, Judicial Council member and Associate Justice Richard Huffman directed the court not to buy any equipment, hire additional staff or transfer services from the technology center without first giving the AOC staff an opportunity to fix the problems that have been plaguing the Sacramento case management system, made worse, according the Judge White, by the fact that the system is hosted by an out of state technology center more that 700 miles away. Presiding Judge White has advised the AOC that the Sacramento Court plans to set up local servers to support CCMS.
In the Daily Journal article, Yarbrough writes, "the Alliance requests that the Judicial Council rescind Huffman's May 11 letter "as a directive." Justice Huffman has declined to comment on the Alliance response, however, he has advised the Daily Journal that Sacramento's plan to host CCMS on local servers would be discussed at the next Judicial Council meeting on June 25.