The lone federal judge stationed in Colorado Springs has quietly adopted a new tool to make it easier for people representing themselves in court to understand what is happening with their case.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Maritza Dominguez Braswell, who joined the bench last summer, is now adding plain English summaries at the beginning of her decisions for lawsuits that have a self-represented, “pro se” plaintiff.

“For pro se parties, litigation is daunting,” she told Colorado Politics in an email. “If I give them information in terms that are simple and straightforward, it helps them better understand the ‘what’ and the ‘why,’ and it moves things along.”

The move by Dominguez Braswell has raised the eyebrows of lawyers who routinely litigate in Colorado’s federal court and, until now, had never seen a judge break down their written rulings specifically for unrepresented plaintiffs.

“I think it’s an excellent idea,” said Ariel DeFazio, who represents workers in employment discrimination cases. “I support any effort to make the process more understandable and transparent. Having a brief paragraph that summarizes a judge’s finding – especially at the beginning of an order that may be very technical and maybe even incomprehensible to a lay/non-legal audience – certainly falls into that category.”

Dominguez Braswell is a former corporate litigator and high-ranking official in the Colorado Attorney General’s Office. As a magistrate judge, she was not appointed by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, but her workload consists of many of the same responsibilities of the life-tenured district judges. Often, magistrate judges are the first to analyze whether to dismiss a civil lawsuit, making recommendations to the district judge assigned to the case.

Last month, Dominguez Braswell recommended dismissing a man’s cruel and unusual punishment claim against the El Paso County sheriff on the legal grounds that he failed to show “the necessary personal participation required for individual liability.”

“Specifically,” she elaborated in her summary for the pro se litigant, “the claim fails because you have not alleged any facts linking that individual to the constitutional injuries you claim.”

U.S. Magistrate Judge Allison Claire of the Eastern District of California is one of the small number of federal judges to include such summaries in her written orders. A public defender prior to her 2012 appointment, she recalled that a large part of her job in handling inmates’ challenges to their convictions during habeas corpus proceedings involved translating legalese to plain English for them.

“When I came to the bench, I really tried to look for every way in which I could expand access to justice for pro se litigants, both incarcerated and un-incarcerated, by creating greater transparency,” Claire told Colorado Politics from her chambers in Sacramento.

Claire also trains new magistrate judges, where she suggests that they use pro se summaries. She is disappointed more judges do not employ the summaries, but acknowledged the difficulty of rewriting legal concepts for a more basic level of comprehension.

“It takes more time to be concise than to be verbose,” Claire said. “I think it’s worth it.”

Dominguez Braswell said that she adopted the pro se summaries after seeing other judges include them in their work. She believes the summaries benefit not just the legally-untrained plaintiff, but the defendant’s lawyers, as well.

“For counsel, litigating opposite a pro se claimant can be difficult and time-consuming. The summary helps counsel stay out of the precarious position of explaining the court’s decision to their client’s adversary,” she said. “In other words, my hope is that the summary makes the process a little easier for everyone.”

Delbert Sgaggio of Colorado Springs has filed multiple lawsuits on his own in federal court. Last year, he sued the city of Pueblo for an alleged First Amendment violation after an officer told Sgaggio’s father-in-law to remove a marijuana plant growing in his backyard. In a Jan. 3 order, Dominguez Braswell explained she was granting the defendants’ request to pause the discovery of evidence until a district judge decides whether to dismiss the case.

Sgaggio said the summary made it easier for him to understand the rest of Dominguez Braswell’s order.

“This gives the pro se litigant a clearer map on where the litigation is going,” he said. “It would be great if other judges used it.”

Some attorneys cautioned there may be legal ramifications if the pro se summary conflicts with the legal analysis contained in the order. But others pointed out that judges already tend to give basic oral explanations to unrepresented litigants when the parties appear in court, and the written summaries are in a similar vein.

“I hope it gains some traction with other judges,” said Darold Killmer, a civil rights attorney. “It is nearly impossible for people to navigate the complex legal system without the help of a lawyer.”