Sentences with phrase «public access to the courts»

He used library accounts to obtain and then make available millions of court records from the Public Access to Court Electronic Records system, which charges for access to documents.

Check the National Center for State Courts website that provides public access to court records.

But it's Public Access to Court Electronic Records.

Yet, this is not a case about free speech writ large, nor about the guaranty of a fair trial, nor about any cognizable constitutional right of public access to the courts.

Years ago, both of these companies saw the approach of broad public access to court opinions.

My latest «Ambrogi on Tech» column for the ABA Journal looks at PacerPro, a better way to search the federal courts» Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system.

Open and public access to court and tribunal decisions facilitates stare decisis, one of the foundational principles of our common law legal system.

The acronym stands for Public Access to Court Electronic Records, but that public access comes with a catch — a registration requirement and a user fee of 8 cents per page.

Both Free Law Project and PlainSite are fighting the good fight for public access to court information — information that should be public in the first place, but isn't.

This emergency Order, promulgated on April 20, 2017, effective April 24, 2017, brings court procedure into conformity with the policies underlying the Rules for Public Access to Court Records.

PACER means «Public Access to Court Electronic Records», giving access to over 500 million U.S. federal court documents, including a listing of parties involved in the litigation,... [more]

An interesting article last week in the UK Human Rights Blog makes the point that it is not so much the unelected bench that results in a democratic deficit, as the lack of meaningful public access to court decisions.

In March in my ABA Journal column, I reviewed PacerPro, a free service for searching the federal courts» Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system.

PACER — Public Access to Court Electronic Records — is the system operated by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to provide online access to case and docket information from the federal appellate, district and bankruptcy courts.

Of interest to law folk will be the fact that back in 2008 Swartz, then a research fellow at Harvard University's Safra Center for Ethics, used a program of his to download 20 % of the documents made available by PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records)-- «more than eighteen million pages with an approximate value of $ 1.5 million,» according to FBI documents — and released them to the public en masse.

The right of public access to the courts is «one of principle... turning, not on convenience, but on necessity».

25 Public access to the courts guarantees the integrity of judicial processes by demonstrating «that justice is administered in a non-arbitrary manner, according to the rule of law».

Instead, she found that the judiciary improperly used PACER fees to fund certain programs related courtroom technology, a web - based juror management service, a victim - notification program, and a program to facilitate public access to court documents by the state of Mississippi.

Malamud claims one of the reasons he is pursuing greater public access to court records is because «there are also massive privacy violations lurking inside some court filings, since clerks, judges and lawyers aren't adhering to rules about what can and can't be in legal filings.»

Ostensibly, this is because the clumsy PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) system is also overpriced — who would have guessed!?

When you attach a document, eCabinet will ask two questions from Rule 6 of the Rules for Public Access to Court Records:

The newest project of the Society is the Supreme Court Docent Program, which will increase public access to the Court by providing tours and other informational services.

Their Docket Report extracts data from government sources such as Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER), U.S. Patent and Trademark Office databases, and Electronic Data Information Source (EDIS).

Matterhorn expands public access to the court and results in efficiencies for court staff that save the public and the court time and money.

The proposed Trial Court Rule XIV, Uniform Rules on Public Access to Court Records, would control access both to physical records in a courthouse and electronic records available online.

Part important public resource, part anachronistic PDF filing cabinet, PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) is outdated at best and downright primitive at worst.

October 14, 2016 — «The paywall that surrounds Pacer (Public Access to Court Electronic Records), an online database of papers filed by litigants in the US federal courts, is facing what may be its most serious test since the service emerged 28 years ago.

«Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) is an electronic public access service that allows users to obtain case and docket information from Federal Appellate, District and Bankruptcy courts, and the U.S. Party / Case Index via the Internet.»

It is also important to note that not all jurisdictions allow public access to court filings, although most do.

It added that a decision in Mr. Skilling's favor might prompt trial judges to cut back on public access to the courts.

For many federal courts this Public Access to Court Electronic Records service (PACER) subsequently became the mechanism for compliance with the E-Government Act's mandate.

February 16, 2017 — «The United States District Court for the District of Columbia certified a class of all individuals and entities who paid fees to obtain court records though the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system.

And so as I am sure most of your listeners are aware, there's the government system called PACER which stands for Public Access to Court Electronic Records.

Quoting the philosopher Jeremy Bentham, the Supreme Court of Canada has repeatedly told Canadians that «publicity is the very soul of justice» and has emphasized the crucial role that public access to court proceedings plays in our democratic system.

PACER means «Public Access to Court Electronic Records», giving access to over 500 million U.S. federal court documents, including a listing of parties involved in the litigation, a listing of court decisions, and copies of documents filed with the court.

(f) public access to the courts guarantees the integrity of judicial processes by demonstrating «that justice is administered in a non-arbitrary manner, according to the rule of law»;

Lex Machina will no longer be hampered by PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) data extraction costs.

From the Pacer site: «Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) is an electronic public access service that allows users to obtain case and docket information from federal appellate, district and bankruptcy courts, and the PACER Case Locator via the Internet.

Not exact matches

The court's decision will allow more room for innovation, and consumers will have more choices to determine for themselves how they access and experience the internet,» Verizon's general counsel of public policy, law and security, Randal Milch, said after the ruling was handed down.

The evangelical - moralist sector has gained access to the White House, the Supreme Court, the Congress; it has a near - monopoly on mass media religion news, popular religion, the production of religious celebrities; it makes clear its positions on what it calls social issues, and is engaged in calling for constitutional amendments and new laws and in protests in the public squares.

To the extent permitted by law, we will disclose your information to government authorities or third parties if: (a) required to do so by law, or in response to a subpoena or court order; (b) we believe in our sole discretion that disclosure is reasonably necessary to protect against fraud, to protect the property or other rights of us or other users, third parties or the public at large; or (c) we believe that you have abused the Sites or the Applications by using them to attack other systems or to gain unauthorized access to any other system, to engage in spamming or otherwise to violate applicable lawTo the extent permitted by law, we will disclose your information to government authorities or third parties if: (a) required to do so by law, or in response to a subpoena or court order; (b) we believe in our sole discretion that disclosure is reasonably necessary to protect against fraud, to protect the property or other rights of us or other users, third parties or the public at large; or (c) we believe that you have abused the Sites or the Applications by using them to attack other systems or to gain unauthorized access to any other system, to engage in spamming or otherwise to violate applicable lawto government authorities or third parties if: (a) required to do so by law, or in response to a subpoena or court order; (b) we believe in our sole discretion that disclosure is reasonably necessary to protect against fraud, to protect the property or other rights of us or other users, third parties or the public at large; or (c) we believe that you have abused the Sites or the Applications by using them to attack other systems or to gain unauthorized access to any other system, to engage in spamming or otherwise to violate applicable lawto do so by law, or in response to a subpoena or court order; (b) we believe in our sole discretion that disclosure is reasonably necessary to protect against fraud, to protect the property or other rights of us or other users, third parties or the public at large; or (c) we believe that you have abused the Sites or the Applications by using them to attack other systems or to gain unauthorized access to any other system, to engage in spamming or otherwise to violate applicable lawto a subpoena or court order; (b) we believe in our sole discretion that disclosure is reasonably necessary to protect against fraud, to protect the property or other rights of us or other users, third parties or the public at large; or (c) we believe that you have abused the Sites or the Applications by using them to attack other systems or to gain unauthorized access to any other system, to engage in spamming or otherwise to violate applicable lawto protect against fraud, to protect the property or other rights of us or other users, third parties or the public at large; or (c) we believe that you have abused the Sites or the Applications by using them to attack other systems or to gain unauthorized access to any other system, to engage in spamming or otherwise to violate applicable lawto protect the property or other rights of us or other users, third parties or the public at large; or (c) we believe that you have abused the Sites or the Applications by using them to attack other systems or to gain unauthorized access to any other system, to engage in spamming or otherwise to violate applicable lawto attack other systems or to gain unauthorized access to any other system, to engage in spamming or otherwise to violate applicable lawto gain unauthorized access to any other system, to engage in spamming or otherwise to violate applicable lawto any other system, to engage in spamming or otherwise to violate applicable lawto engage in spamming or otherwise to violate applicable lawto violate applicable laws.

By guiding, informing, and coordinating alternative options for parents, educators, health and human service professionals, faith - based counselors, legislators, and the public at - large, CRC is able to help reduce divorce and strengthen families through custody reform; parental mediation and training; conciliation and access; parental financial and educational support systems; legislative revision and court briefs.

A lawsuit filed by a labor union for the NYPD that seeks to block the release of footage from officers» body - worn cameras without a court order may have far - reaching implications for public access to videos of police incidents, including fatal shootings.

Police were within their rights to deprive members of the public of access to food, water and toilets during a 2001 protest, the European court of human rights has ruled.

The Access Bank (GH) East Cant cheque number 890081 and the Attorney General's receipt which were exhibited to the Attorney General's affidavit sworn by the Attorney General herself on 9th November 2016 as Exhibits «AG 7» and «AG7A» are attached herewith in PDF for the public to judge how any Attorney General, worth the name, can accept a cheque drawn on the Economic and Organized Crime Office which was not party to the action as part payment of the refund ordered by the Court on 29th July 2014 for the Republic.

Other laws are designed to affect those who interpret them, such as the provision that takes effect Feb. 26 that creates a rotating schedule of courts to hold off - hours arraignments in counties outside of New York City to ensure that stakeholders — including judges, prosecutors and public defenders — are not strained by nighttime arrests and the poor, particularly in sparsely populated counties, have access to adequate representation.

Correction officials frequently note the poor condition of the jails, which they say put staff and inmates at risk, while inmate advocates argue the jail is hard to access for families who want to visit, is far from courts where inmates must make appearances, and is out of the public eye.

The New York Times and NBCUniversal, citing the First Amendment right of access to the courts, filed papers arguing that the materials should be made public.

«Dominic Ayine, the Deputy Minister for Justice who represented the Government in the Supreme Court and opposed my application, and others, went public with the electronic and print media to mount unconstitutional and contumacious attacks and insults on the Court decision and on my person for daring to access the Court.»

But he and members of other good government groups are putting a priority on strengthening FOIL in other ways, including passing a law that would mandate the payment of attorneys» fees to a plaintiff when a court finds that an agency had no «reasonable basis» to deny access to a public record.