Why don't the Governor and the Legislature broach the real problem? The problems are going to increase with the Judicial Branch as this funding/revenue problem continues. Why don't we just for one year "TRY" a sales or income tax? Why don't we Try expanded gambling? Why don't we at least look across our borders at other states and see how they fund Courts, schools, state government, etc? Wake up people, we advertise that we're a vacation state and rely heavily on tourist dollars when we should make our state government soluable on our own within our border and under our control. It's high time we stop protecting the 30,000 or so millionaires that call this state home for tax reasons!

that will do a days work for a days pay. Many of them have no common sense and shouldn't even be on the bench. Others think they are Gods and break every rule in the book. Pretty bad when a person can't get speedy justice guaranteed by the Constitution.

Suggestion: tax the winnings in court. Say somebody gets a $1 million jury verdict in a civil case. Thus either take 10% of such from the winner, in effect of going from a gross to net $amount, or tack on ten percent, thus leaving the thief who stole the money or whatever to have to pay $1.1 million.

Either way with the thief example, it's still less than the sevenfold figure, as neither the judges nor juries go by the higher law as outlined from two courts cases within the N.H. Restitution statute RSA Ch. 651:63 citing the State v. Flemming case of 1984 to Blackstone's Commentaries who cited the Bible and Proverbs 6:30-31 for this x 7 amount.

JSH

P.S. Then a portion of this $amount can be used to offset the filing fees, because that statute or rule is unlawful as against Article 14 of the N.H. Const., Part the First of Two & Bill of Rights for legal remediews to be FREE, complete and prompt*. Somehow the judges have removed the "R" in FREE to a FEE!

* prompt = without delay
delay = postpone
post = after
pone = meal

So, yes: The George Orwellian "Nineteen Eighty Four" days have arrived.

sit in any superior court and watch the waste going on. most everyone is there, except for the public defender of course, they cover so many district courts and none of the court actually talk to each other regarding scheduling. also the defendants are such screw ups that they usually have cases in district court as well as superior court. get a clue court system, become more effecient with your scheduling. if someone has a case in district and superior court hear them both in supierior. as far a judge shortage? are you kidding me (again) how about some superior court judges coming of the mountain and sitting in district court? how about giving judges an 10% pay cut, most of the them make over 130K a year.

The creation of the Family Court sucked tens of millions of dollars out of the budget, and it was running inefficiently when there was money available. It will continue to fail whether or not more money is pumped into it. Its creation was and is the classic case of the cure being worse than the disease. Only a change of mind-set, governing principles, and supervisory personnel could possibly make a difference. But don't count on it happening. Judge Broderick has fawningly capitulated to the legislature's bad ideas for years, and he lacks the will and the vision to lead the court in time of trouble. The real loss is to other civil cases sitting on the back burner. Insurance companies will count their annual savings in hundreds of millions as litigants give up on ever getting a trial and settle for chump change (the good news is that some personal inury lawyers will go out of business). Dishonest but not quite criminal business dealings will go unchecked, and financially desperate people will damage each other economically without fear of retribution. Only the criminal processes of the court will come close to keeping pace (as bad economic times lead to more crime) because losing that piece, too, would bring us closer to anarchy than anyone dares to let happen.