Today, the Oregon Judicial Department rolls out a new fee schedule that significantly changes how we pay for our court system and who pays for it. The picture of justice in Oregon is changing fast, and it isn't pretty or fair.

We're moving away from a system in which justice is a shared responsibility to a system in which those who exercise their constitutional rights are supposed to pay a large entry tax. Up until Oct. 1, a group of consumers harmed by fraud had to pay a single filing fee of $189 to file a complaint in state court. After Oct. 1, that same group may have to pay a fee of several thousand dollars.

Our law firm often represents investors harmed by fraud. For instance, we represent a group of 10 people who invested in securities that were misrepresented to them as safe investments. The investors have lost their entire principal, while some of the fraudsters made off with their money. We filed their complaint on Sept. 25. If we had waited until today, the filing fee could have been more than $6,000. Our law firm has done this analysis for other cases we've filed in the past. The presumptive fee in one case would have been $33,329. In that case, we represented more than 60 victims of a fraud and an individual defendant wound up in jail following criminal charges. Under the law, we can ask the court to waive the fee, but there is no right to a reduced fee.

Our state court was designed based on fundamental principles of equal access to justice and fairness. The new filing fees are also flawed in that regard. Before today, a group of plaintiffs and defendants would pay the same single fee. Now, a group of plaintiffs generally has to pay twice the size of fee (perhaps more) that defendants have to pay. Under the new system, a group of plaintiffs is charged a separate fee for each plaintiff and each defendant involved in the case. Defendants are charged only for the number of defendants involved in the case, and the defendants may get a discount for acting as a group.

There is a significant problem if access to courts falls heavily on those who try to exercise their constitutional
rights. Everyone recognizes our entire state government is under significant budget pressure and has a choice to reduce services or obtain new revenue streams. The courts are no different. The courts are underfunded by the Legislature and have been forced to go it alone and find new revenue to stay open.

Our courts, however, should not be designed on a pay-to-play system. As a public, we should share equally in the cost of a constitutional system founded on the fundamental right to a jury trial and the rule of law. We all benefit from it.

An opinion letter from Scott Shorr, one of Stoll Berne's shareholders, published on The Stump, OregonLive.com (The Oregonian's website) on October 1, 2009.