Updates Proposed to Enhance Data Collection of Court Case Statistics

Various blue bar and line graphs on paper, depicting data and trends, with a magnifying glass emphasizing analysis.

Proposed changes to data collected about Ohio court cases are aimed at improving quality and usability.

The Supreme Court of Ohio opened a public comment period on proposals to modernize case information collected from Ohio courts and to restructure the forms used to gather the data.

The proposed changes are designed to improve the quality and usability of the data reported to the Supreme Court and available to the public through the Court’s data dashboards. These amendments to Rules 37, 39, and 42 of the Rules of Superintendence for the Courts of Ohio are part of the second phase in a review of the statistical reporting processes for Ohio courts.

Data to Be Gathered on Tolling, Additional Case Types, Interpreters, and More
One significant proposed change is to separate data about cases that are tolled, which means placed on inactive status, from cases that have reached a true disposition, or outcome. Each form for trial courts to report case data would include a stand-alone section to identify specific reasons for tolling a case. This information would be gathered from probate divisions for the first time.

Protection orders would be added as a new case category for general divisions and domestic relations divisions of common pleas courts. New categories would be incorporated to track complex civil cases in probate divisions and felony cases designated as complex criminal cases in general divisions. In addition, case types would be expanded in domestic relations and juvenile divisions to capture actions by non-married parents or by third parties, such as grandparents.

Collecting information about the use of interpreters in courts would be broadened under the proposals. Currently, only data on interpreters provided through the LanguageLine phone and video service is gathered. With the change, interpreter use would be tracked across all court jurisdictions to gain a better understanding of the interpreter landscape in Ohio.

Data about individuals representing themselves in legal proceedings also would be tracked in every jurisdiction except probate divisions, which deal with a high volume of heirs who are considered self-represented parties.

For probate divisions, an amendment would adjust how frequently they must report data – from quarterly to monthly. That shift would align probate divisions with the monthly reporting requirements of all other divisions of common pleas courts.

Information Would Be Expanded Regarding Dispositions and Sentences
Trial court forms for reporting case statistics would also include a detailed “Manner of Disposition” section, providing statewide information on case outcomes that hasn’t been previously collected. The new section would track mental health-related outcomes, such as not guilty by reason of insanity or not competent/not restorable. It would also capture detailed data about reasons for case dismissals, including lack of a speedy trial, diversion, intervention in lieu of conviction, or dispute resolution.

In addition, data would be gathered regarding sentences, including prison, death, community control, and jail/community-based correctional facilities.

Updates to the related statistical reporting forms are part of the proposals.

First Phase Addressed Case Time Standards
Judges in the courts of appeals, courts of common pleas, municipal courts, and county courts are required to report caseload statistics and case processing timeliness data to the Case Management Section of the Supreme Court. 

In phase 1, changes were made to the time standards for resolving cases in the domestic relations, general, and juvenile divisions of common pleas courts, as well as in municipal and county courts.
Those changes, which were adopted by the Supreme Court and took effect Jan. 1, 2026, set a percentage-based performance target and a time period within which judges are expected to dispose of cases.
 
Submitting Comments
The Advisory Committee on Case Management presented these recommendations to the Court, which unanimously approved them for public comment. Public comments help the Court gain insights for enhancing data collection, timeliness, and transparency within Ohio’s court system. Comments on the proposals should be sent in writing by July 13, 2026, to statsreporting@sc.ohio.gov or:

Chris Geocaris
Supreme Court of Ohio
65 S. Front St.
Columbus, Ohio 43215-3431

For comments submitted by email, include your full name and mailing address.