Audit of the Appeals Court

This is a state performance audit of the Massachusetts Appeals Court covering September 1, 2018 through October 31, 2019.

“This report details the audit objectives, scope, methodology, findings, and recommendations for the audit period, September 1, 2018 through October 31, 2019.”

Auditors checked whether the court followed fee-waiver rules, whether electronic filing saved time, and whether fees were properly assessed, collected, and reconciled.

“In this performance audit, we examined the Appeals Court’s compliance with Section 4 of Chapter 262 of the General Laws and Rules 8a–8f of the Massachusetts Rules of Electronic Filing, as well as the efficiency of the electronic document filing system eFileMA.”

If the court does not keep and check the right records, it cannot be sure all money owed to the court was collected, recorded, and deposited.

“Without collecting and verifying all supporting documentation, the Appeals Court cannot reliably conclude that all revenue has been obtained, recorded, and deposited.”

For the public, this matters because court money should be tracked clearly, and electronic filing appears to save staff time in processing cases.

“We determined that the Appeals Court would have reduced the processing time by 313 hours if all paper briefs and motions tested during the audit had been filed electronically.”

The court generally met the audit goals on fee waivers and electronic filing, but failed the goal related to fee collection and reconciliation.

“Does the Appeals Court ensure that fees are assessed in accordance with Section 4 of Chapter 262 of the General Laws and are verified through reconciliation and collection, in accordance with the Comptroller of the Commonwealth’s guidance on cash recognition and reconciliation?”

The auditor recommended that the court keep all supporting records, formally document mismatches, and make sure the prior day’s cases are processed before running fee reports.

“The Fiscal Office should confirm that all cases from the previous day have been processed before generating the Fees Paid—Detail Report.”

This was not about a tiny corner of government: during the audit period, the Appeals Court handled more than two thousand cases and had annual appropriations of over $13 million.

“The Appeals Court administered and processed 2,088 cases during our audit period.”

A reconciliation is a check that payment and deposit records match; an affidavit of indigency is paperwork used to show someone may qualify to have court fees waived.

“This process involves comparing the results from all sources that produce or contain payments and deposit information, and ensuring that they match.”