[legalxml-courtfiling-cms-api] Sdurham Response to Mo's Comments

>> getCaseHistory: as in other 
queries, add "the court may choose to return a hyperlink to the case docket. 
<<

Yes, this is something we agreed to change at the Boston meeting.  
Done and done.

>> getAssociatedCases: I 
suggest changing the name of this query to "getActorAssociatedCases" or 
"getActorActiveCases" because that is what the query seems to what to know. The 
term "Associated Cases" often refers to cases related to or consolidated with 
another case (this is how the term is used in Arizona).  Changing the name 
of the query will make it clearer. <<

 

I concur with the comment and I support the 
suggestion. How about just simply 'GetCaseList'...  which 
leaves us room to later add other means (overload) to find a caseList other 
than by 'actor'.

 

 

>> 
getCaseCalendar: I suggest adding "DocumentDue" to the "Response" for 
this query or something similar.  The reason is that often what litigants 
want to know is not only when a hearing or oral argument is scheduled but when a 
document is due to be filed (Opening Brief for example.)  <<

A) I am unsure of how many CMS actually keep track of these legal 
deadlines.  So.. my first reaction is that it is not of significant 
practical use (I know... often 'practical' hasn't been a theme of our 
work.  But.. it's never too late to start..)

B) The changes that we agreed to make in Boston, include defining 
the response to 'CaseCalendar' as the CourtFIling 'courtEvent' data 
structure.  It hasn't been well tested yet... and so it still has some 
limitations in its definition.  ONe of which is that I don't think it would 
well capture the 'legal deadline' you are referring to.

C) MOST IMPORTANTLY: All that said, the 'courtEvent' *could* be used to 
express a legal deadline (as I like to say, it could be more elegant, but, 
nevertheless, it would work.)  If you think of a 'deadline' as a 
special eventType without location.  And so, the proposed query and 
response for CaseCalendar *could* work for those courts that wish to express 
deadlines.

So.. I propose making no special query/response accomodations for 
document deadlines. If others do not concur with me, then 
we'll see what we can do about it. Fair enough?

- 
Shane

 

 

 

  
-----Original Message-----
From: Rowley, Moira 
  [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 
  6:28 PM
To: 'Mohyeddin Abdulaziz'; 
Cc: 
  ''
Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] 
  Query and Response Specification - Pl easeReview by September 24t 
  h

  
Mo: 
  Thanks for the comments.  I did not see them 
  until tonight, since we've been in the meetings all day.  
   We'll have to talk this over to see if we can work on these within the 
  timeframe that we have.  If not, they'll be at the top of the list for 
  V2.  Lets see what we can do.

  
 

  
Also 
  . .  congrats on getting your document work moving along.  Nice 
  work.  - Moira

  
 

  
-----Original Message-----
From: 
  Mohyeddin Abdulaziz [mailto:]
Sent: 
  Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:40 AM
To: Rowley, Moira; 
  
Subject: Re: [legalxml-courtfiling] Query and 
  Response Specification - PleaseReview by September 24t h

  Greetings Moira and Dwight, 
    
Thank you very much for the excellent work on the Query/Response standard 
    and I am really sorry for the tardiness in sending the following 
    comments/questions. 
    
1) getAssociatedCases: I suggest changing the name of this query to 
    "getActorAssociatedCases" or "getActorActiveCases" because that is what the 
    query seems to what to know. The term "Associated Cases" often refers to 
    cases related to or consolidated with another case (this is how the term is 
    used in Arizona).  Changing the name of the query will make it clearer. 

    
2) getCaseCalendar: I suggest adding "DocumentDue" to the "Response" for 
    this query or something similar.  The reason is that often what 
    litigants want to know is not only when a hearing or oral argument is 
    scheduled but when a document is due to be filed (Opening Brief for 
    example.) 
    
3) getCaseHistory: as in other queries, add "the court may choose to 
    return a hyperlink to the case docket. 
    
thanks very much. 
    
Mohyeddin