What Does OCA Mean in a Court Context?
When in court, the term "OCA" may refer to the Office of Court Administration. The Office of Court Administration handles various administrative court matters in the New York State. According to its website, it is "the administrative agency for the unified court system of the State of New York and has widespread oversight authority over the courts and court-related agencies." It is the "administrative backbone of the court system" according to the NY State Unified Court System.
However , these initials may also stand for "principal office," which is defined in Judiciary Law Section 14. In this context, the OCA is the principal office of the court that is handling a particular legal matter. This is relevant when it comes to complying with legal process and directing requests for information to the appropriate office.
The Importance of the Office of Court Administration
According to its website, "the Office of Court Administration (OCA) is responsible for the administrative oversight of the New York State Unified Court System." OCA is charged with establishing policies and guidelines overseeing the operation of the court system. It is worth noting that in New York, the Supreme Court is divided into various departments, trial court divisions, and Appellate Divisions. OCA establishes the policies and procedures that govern the entire Court System, regardless of the appellate and departmental divisions of the court.
All judicial functions are overseen by OCA under the office of the Deputy Chief Administrative Judge, Office of Court Administration, which is responsible for administrative oversight of the State’s court system. Functions of this office include administration, court operations, court facilities, court resources, and court technology.
As it pertains to family law matters, OCA is responsible for establishing the Statutory Short Form Powers of Attorney and Statutory Health Care Proxy, which is commonly signed by elderly individuals and is a vital part of an estate plan. OCA is also responsible for Leadership Development in the court system from judicial to non-judicial personnel.
OCA also establishes the financial disclosure requirements for attorneys. OCA has also taken the position on its website that although "Lawyers do not have to personally serve a subpoena on the attorney they represent, New York City Civil Court Local Rule 208(c)(3) requires the lawyer to serve a copy of the subpoena on the attorney that represents the alleged judgment debtor(s) as well as the alleged judgment debtor whose records are sought."
OCA’s Important Role in Case Management
The OCA plays a central role in the effective management of cases filed in courts across the state. A significant portion of the casework carried out by the OCA is devoted to improved case management. The Office develops and disseminates information on creating and managing a case management system that successfully reduces the time between the filing of a lawsuit and the final disposition or trial. This includes the creation and dissemination of information on scheduling and related court calendars, and various other assistance to enable a more efficient court calendar.
Staff of the Office of Court Administration prepare and provide information on innovative techniques for the use of court resources. Staff avail themselves to the expertise of OCA in workgroups and task forces to develop new concepts on making the courts more effective and efficient. The concept of using senior judges to ease the backlog and increase the efficiency of the court system, for example, was initiated by staff of the OCA. The Administrative Board endorses and supports the efforts of the OCA, as it seeks to generate innovative ideas for resolving situations that affect the management of the court system.
The Significance of OCA to Attorneys
The Office of Court Administration (OCA) has a direct impact on the everyday lives of legal professionals ranging from judges to attorneys to court staff. For example, it is the OCA that provides procedures and protocols for attorneys and litigants to follow when filing documents with the Court. Filing documents in the trial courts of New York State is governed by the Uniform Civil Rules for the Supreme Court and the County CLERK’S offices in NYC. In order to fulfill their responsibilities, court staff are guided by the OCA’s Executive Director, who issues various court directives regarding procedures and practices that are to be followed.
The OCA is also responsible for the assignment of cases across the state, the appointment of judges, and the administration and oversight of court personnel. It manages the budgets for the entire state court system and allocates the funds accordingly. Much of this is done through the various Committees and Commissions created by the Administrative Board of the Courts. The OCA allocates most of its resources to the operation and maintenance of the New York City Civil Court, including the authority over civil matters, such as personal injury, malpractice, products liability and a host of other tort cases. Upon receiving a case assignment, judges have very little discretion in terms of managing the case.
Judges are court employees whose responsibilities are defined by the OCA at all levels of the court system. From administrative judges to administrative clerks, staffing of the courts falls under the jurisdiction of the OCA. Those who are appointed by the governor to sit on the bench must first be approved by the State Senate, and once appointed, the OCA provides performance evaluations and certification to sit for re-appointment. While all judges are court employees, many Supreme Court Judges have private practice experience, as well as experience working in the office of the Bronx County District Attorney.
Common OCA Misunderstandings
As with any issue or organization that operates on a complex level of interactions, there are always some misconceptions about how things work at the Office of Court Administration (OCA). Below are several common issues that practitioners and even judges can have incorrect impressions about.
The Office of Court Administration (OCA) Is Making Decisions About What Cases Are Heard In Each Court: This is one of the most common misconceptions about OCA. Questions about what cases are heard in which courts should be directed to administrative judges for the trial courts in your area. They make the decisions about what court is hearing what cases and when they are to be heard. OCA is not involved in that level of decision-making.
OCA Is Dealing With the Need to Add More Judges: The issue of judicial vacancies or additions to the bench is resolved on a legislative level through a process that often includes calls for "more judges" as well. OCA’s Office of Court Research publishes a study on the needs of the courts every few years. This study includes an analysis of whether more judicial positions or support positions are needed. OCA makes no decisions on the number of judges or support personnel. These decisions are made by the Legislature and OCA doesn’t even make recommendations concerning those issues anymore .
OCA Chooses Which Programs and Applications Are Implemented: Currently there are 18 state courts involved in a content management project that will provide them with the ability to electronically manage and update the documents they create for each case. This is more accurately considered a pilot program that will eventually be available statewide. It is already up and running in most of the 20 largest counties in New York State. It will be rolled out in stages over the next few years until it is available statewide.
OCA Expects Us to Learn to Use All Their Programs and When Something Goes Wrong With One of Them We Have No Recourse: There are a number of programs and applications that have been and will be offered through OCA. However, given the limited amount of time that attorneys have to gain familiarity with any new program. The revolution of technology in the courtroom has produced a number of products that, notwithstanding their promises, seem to fail at the worst possible moments. There are so many products available that resolving any issues you have with a particular product can take on a life of its own. Because of this, any mix of programs run by the Office of Court Administration continues to produce issues that seem to alter from year to year. This becomes very burdensome for attorneys and judges, who then rely on the knowledge of support staff unfamiliar with some of these programs.
Why OCA Matters When Streamlining Judicial Processes
The Office of Court Administration (OCA) plays a pivotal role in ensuring that the judicial system operates smoothly and efficiently. It serves an important administrative purpose that is distinct from the essential function of impartial adjudication performed by our judges. While the judges are, as one distinguished former judge and Administrative Judge succinctly put it – "the crown jewels of our court system" and are charged with the responsibility of interpreting the law, deciding cases and then administering justice in all individual disputes, it is the OCA that is tasked with overseeing the whole system and ensuring that it works well and is operating at optimal efficiency. "Administration" of the courts is not a bad thing – it is a good thing.
Pursuant to Judiciary Law §213-a, each year the OCA is required to deliver an educational program directed toward improving the administration of the courts and educating judges and law clerks on relevant areas of the law.
Over the years, I have attended many court sponsored seminars, courses and conferences on numerous different topics. Some of the noteworthy topics include: Judicial Ethics, Domestic Violence, Opioid and other Drug Abuse, Insurance Issues, Motions and Trials, Divorce and Custody, Commercial and Consumer Law, Mental Illness, Foreclosures, Mediation, Resolution Programs, Legal Writing, Family Offenses, Domestic Relations, and Guardianships to name a few.
In the past several years, The Office of Court Administration has improved and offered a great deal for attorneys attending court and for attorneys who seek information about the workings of the courts. OCA’s recent efforts to empower and help attorney’s learn how to navigate through the courts, is, in my opinion, one of the major improvements to the court system. I have found many of the new on-line and court programs to be quite helpful.
OCA has published and makes available many helpful on-line opportunities. Below is a sample of what OCA provides online:
The OCA has also recently adopted a standard set of Local Rules. This has been a great benefit for both lawyers and litigants. For example, Supreme Court Civil Parts in Nassau and Suffolk counties recently adopted new Parts’ Rules and Guidelines which outline the procedural requirements for motions and conferences before each court. These on-line rules and guidelines replace the previous individual "Parts’ Rules" which were different and sometimes conflicting among the various judges and courts.
The OCA oversees 53 Specialty Courts, including Drug Treatment Courts, Veteran’s Courts, and Domestic Violence Courts – all of these programs help people seek assistance for their problems while also keeping them out of the criminal justice system.
The OCA also has many other important job functions and responsibilities and oversees: Interpreter Services; the Civil and Criminal Calendars; the Management of Case Records; The Assignment of Counsel in criminal cases; Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR); Arbitration; Mediation; and Conciliation and Problem-Solving Courts.
I could go on and more and more about the OCA and its many online resources. However, I encourage you to look at the OCA’s website directly and navigate around it yourself. It is worth a trip to the cyberworld of the OCA’s website.
The Current State and Future of OCA
The OCA is primarily charged with maintaining the Administrative Rules for the New York State Courts. These are the set of rules that function in conjunction with the statutes to form the Laws and Rules of the Courts of the State of New York. The Administrative Rules are typically updated, amended and published every year.
There are several new initiatives or challenges that the OCA is faced with which will impact the Administrative Rules going forward. These include:
Electronic filing continues to be a hot topic amongst the members of the legal profession, as well as among sitting judges. Attorneys and litigants are generally becoming more comfortable with the idea of electronic filing, however, some of the anticipated problems have yet to be addressed, such as: implementing a universal statewide E-filing system; developing a uniform computer interface for the Courts’ filing windows; etc.
One issue that has been addressed by the OCA, as well as members of its e-filing advisory committee, is the timeline for E-filing. Currently, one must follow the OCA’s proposed timeline for e-filing, as opposed to the timeline that would otherwise be dictated by disposition from the appellate courts regarding a specific issue. In cases where there is a pending e-filing issue at the Appellate Division, the litigant must proceed with the OCA’s timeline, which for the most part has operated outside of the "normal" litigation timeline . This has led to additional filing costs for litigants.
Other issues which have arisen, include the fact that unlike traditional filing, e-filing might not be appropriate in certain types of cases where expedited relief or strict time limitations are present.
Courts are being asked to consider using e-filing for divorce matters which have no custody or support issues, in many instances. This has been suggested because some courts are inundated with divorce matters and are unable to timely handle those types of cases. Some judges are, in fact, allowing these types of cases to be e-filed, so long as the petition is uncontested and involves only a simple you-story- I- pay-your- bills divorce.
Criminal courts have recently been using e-filing, and no foreseeable end is in site. This has stemmed from the increased use of court watch groups in criminal prosecutions. Such special interest groups are allowed to monitor ongoing criminal cases and sometimes utilize the court’s own filed documents to prosecute their own investigations.
As suggested in my earlier post, these types of cases are often very time sensitive. Hence, it is crucial that any issues regarding a proposed timeline for e-filing be reviewed to prevent the unintended costs incurred by the litigants.