Follow up: Child Support Related Elements, Judgment Related Elements, F

Hello,

Attached are two items to follow up about assignments from the last Face to Face Meeting. The Excel Spreadsheet lists proposed elements taking into account Child Support and Judgment related elements, and the PDF and MS Word Document are a resubmission of the proposal for Format Versions.

For Child Support Elements:

The list of elements originally submitted for child support elements has been pared down with recommendations for addition to the core, civil or domestic specific, and elements in the NCSC IEPD which are not found in ECF 3.0, but which are not proposed to be added at this point.

For Judgment Elements:

On the last conference call of the subgroup, it was noticed that the judgment proposals by Shane from Lexis-Nexis Bulk Filings and those for Child Support were similar and somewhat overlapping. I moved the judgment related items from Child Support to be proposed for the core message as there was a good deal of commonality between them and those used by Lexis-Nexis. The elements are listed with Child Support related definitions, but if the general element listings are acceptable, changing them over to general court case definitions can make them applicable to general court cases instead of only child support specific ones. The items which do not match exactly to those from Lexis-Nexis schema are “JudgmentStatus” and “JudgmentType”. Roles in judgments elements also do not match exactly with the child support related elements can be found from the case information, such as the case judge and participant roles. For JudgmentStatus, there is a commencement date which is a status indicator and the case disposition which can tell this information also. This is not a perfect match, so JudgmentStatus may also need to be added depending on if a commencement date and disposition type will not satisfy the requirements. For JudgmentType, I assume that this can be found by the case disposition. If the case is disposed, then the judgment is granted, and if not, then the judgment is proposed. (Shane, will these substitutions work for JudgmentStatus and JudgmentType?)

From Lexis Nexis Schema:

- JudgmentType {proposed or granted}

- JudgmentStatus { satisfied or not }

- JudgmentJudge { the judge supervising the judgment }

- JudgmentPersonRole / OrganizationRole { relationships of litigants to the judgment - creditor or debtor)

- Fees ( base amount, interest, court costs, etc. )

For Format Versions:

The previous submission is being resubmitted after a revised version was proposed and rejected by the working group during a conference call due to undesired effects of the change on the schemas.

Please let me know if there are any comments, questions, or changes to be made. Sorry for submitting this late before the Face to Face meeting.

Thank you,

Rex

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the entity or individual(s) to whom they are addressed and not for reliance upon by unintended recipients. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient be advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail and any files transmitted are strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please delete the entire email and immediately notify us by email to the sender or by telephone to the AOC main office number, (404) 656-5171. Thank you.

legalxml-courtfiling message