A section in DCYF's "Court and Legal Handbook" emphasizes the importance of working with the court system to ensure its fullest cooperation. That's pretty scary, but does this actually happen? The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) allows people to ask specific questions of the government and get answers, and I tried this with the district court system. I wrote to both Judge Edwin Kelly, who oversees DCYF cases, and the judges who hear cases.

September 8, 1999

The Honorable Edwin Kelly
Administrative Office of the Courts
PO Box 389
Concord, NH 03302-0389

Re: RSA 91-A Right to Know Request

Dear Judge Kelly,

I am enclosing for your review a copy of my web page, which quotes DCYF Policy Directive 86-26, and a copy of Rogers Lang's answer to my 1987 Right to Know regarding that policy.

Specifically, I would like to refer you to the last two paragraphs quoted from pp. 9 - 10 of the Court and legal handbook (copies of the actual handbook included for reference). Regarding DCYF's policies on district offices of meeting with judges "to become familiar with each other" and meetings "to discuss mutual concerns or resolve any problems which may arise," please answer the following questions:

1. Have you personally ever met with people from DCYF privately outside the courtroom for any reason, or to "to discuss mutual concerns or resolve any problems which may arise?"

2. If the answer to the above question is "yes," please, to the best of your ability, and using any calendars that the Court keeps for your business schedule, list the dates and times of said meetings, the names of the people involved in such meetings, and the subject matter discussed in such meetings.

3. Have you ever attended a meeting with than one judge (i.e. "as a group") with any DCYF personnel for purposes of advising judges on changes in the law that affect the Division, for statistical review of the Division's manpower and caseload, to discuss various differences between the courts, for purposes of standardizing those differences or to discuss any other issues?

4. If so, please to the best of your ability, and using any calendars that the Court keeps for your business schedule, list the dates and times of said meetings, the names of the people involved in such meetings, and the subject matter discussed in such meetings.

5. Do you know of any other judges in the District courts who have had individual meetings with DCYF personnel or supervisors "to discuss mutual concerns" or meetings "as a group" for purposes listed in question #3?

6. If the answer to question # 3 is "yes," please indicate all of the judges you personally know of who have had these types of meetings with DCYF personnel, the dates of such meetings, the names of the people who attended such meetings, and to the best of your ability and knowledge, the substance of said meetings.

7. For any meetings previously requested, if an itinerary or notes or minutes of said meetings were kept, please forward those itineraries or notes or minutes to me as well.

I thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

	Sincerely,
	Paula J. Werme, Esq.

Cc: File
        Ned Gordon, Chair Person
        DCYF Field Practices Study Committee
        NH Senate Judiciary Committee

I numbered the requests above because that makes it harder for a request to be missed. Nevertheless, the reply I received completely ignores most of the above:

September 16, 1999

Dear Attorney Werme,

I have received your letter dated September 8, 1999.

It is our general policy in the District Court System to encourage judges and clerks to meet regularly with a wide variety of users of the judicial system. Meetings occur with representatives of the Division for Children, Youth, and Families, as well as with the law enforcement community, the defense and civil bar, and others. These meetings are designed to encourage the more effective administration of justice. Topics such as caseflow management and other general administrative issues are routine, while discussions about pending matters are forbidden.

Very truly yours,

Edwin W. Kelly
Administrative Judge

Responses from other judges were shorter and took a form like:

Dear Attorney Werme,

I have received your letter of September 8, 1999 regarding court system involvement with the Division for Children, Youth, and Famliies. I have also received a copy of Judge Kelly's response to your identical letter. I join in his response, but would only add that we also attend conferences together on topics of common interest.

Susan B. Carbon
[Plymouth and Littleton Family Court Judge]

I understand that the court system is busy, but it will take them less time to answer my questions than to try to avoid me. I can be very persistant. The next step was a new letter to Judge Kelly to reiterate the detail I want:

September 19, 1999

The Honorable Edwin W. Kelly
Administrative Judge
PO Box 389
Concord, NH 03302

Re: September 8, 1999 Right to Know

Dear Judge Kelly,

Thank you for responding to my Right to Know Request. While you vaguely confirmed that meetings do take place between yourself and DCYF officials, I believe you failed to specifically answer any of the questions posed in the letter. As there was testimony at last Thursday's hearings that you had already contacted DCYF regarding the recent Supreme Court Decision on Consent Decrees, it would appear that communications between yourself and DCYF include communications not only about caseflow management and the administration of justice, but regarding how the courts will handle changes in the law, as indicated in the DCYF Court and Legal Handbook.

In the interest of pursuing the matter further, please, in addition to answering specifically my questions 1 - 7 of the September 8 Right to Know letter, attach all correspondence, writing, notes, memos, and documents relating to your meetings with DCYF. Also, please indicate for me any and all dates you have met with Child Abuse Defense Attorneys to discuss the "administration of justice" and all writings, notes, memos, and documents relating to those meetings. You may indicate which members of the bar were present.

I would also like to know the District Court's procedure on appointing attorneys for Child Abuse and Neglect cases, and whether or not there is a list of rotating attorneys, as there is for criminal cases that cannot be handled by the public defender, or whether or not this is strictly based on judicial preference.

Finally, I would like for you to define for me "the administration of justice" as used in your letter, as it appears to be a term about which reasonable persons could differ in their individual interpretations.

	Sincerely,
	Paula J. Werme, Esq.

Cc: File
        Ned Gordon, Chair Person
        DCYF Field Practices Study Committee
        NH Senate Judiciary Committee

To date (November 20), I have not received a reply, but have not attempted further followup. Senator Gordon may invite Judge Kelly to address the committee at a future hearing.

One thing that Judge Kelly failed to mention is the Court Improvement Project, that will, in part, "implement a plan for New Hampshire that will increase judicial involvement in abuse and neglect cases." Clearly, it's time for a new FOI request:

November 20, 1999

Kristin Lamont
The Honorable Edwin W. Kelly
PO Box 389
Concord, NH 03302

Re: Right to Know

Dear Ms. Lamont and Judge Kelly,

I found information on the NH Court Improvement Project enclosed on the web just today, and was amazed that information was not brought to my attention by Judge Kelly in response to my last Right to Know about communications with DCYF officials. It would seem to me that such a fair-minded committee working to improve Court procedures in abuse and neglect cases, as well as parental termination cases would be happy to disclose the substance of their work to anyone seeking information about it.

Please forward to me the names of all members of the Project's Advisory Committee, dates of any meetings the committee has had, and minutes of those meetings, and any documents regarding Court performance that have been generated by the committee in the interest of improving it.

	Sincerely,
	Paula J. Werme, Esq.

Cc: File
        The Honorable Ned Gordon

Judge Kelly spoke at a CLE (Continuing Law Education) session I attended. I haven't heard back on this either.

January 25, 2000

The Honorable Edwin Kelly
Administrative Office of the District Courts
PO Box 389
Concord, NH 03302-0389 Re: Court Improvement Project

Right to Know

Dear Judge Kelly,

Thank you for agreeing to answer my question Friday at the CLE on the Adoption and Safe Families Act on the subcommittees developing protocols to improve the quality and depth of Court hearings. I would like to serve on the subcommittee that is working to improve the quality of hearings, if that is possible. I would like to meet with you at some time in the near future to give you my ideas on why it is critically necessary to communicate to the judges that because they have the authority to waive the rules of evidence, that they should be taking all due care to ensure that evidence admitted is reliable and material to the adjudication or disposition of a child's status.

. . . material deleted.

You may reach me at the office number. Thank you.

	Sincerely,
	Paula J. Werme, Esq.

Cc: File

Contact Paula Werme, Esq. or return to Law Practice home page.

Last updated 2001 January 7.