A concern some courts could have would be the liability or responsbility
to the court for handling the 'Serving' item. What liability would the
court face if there was any failure in that process, be it a mistyped or
not updated email address, system downtime, or any other failure?
Should the court take that responsibility?
Kind of along the lines of why the Bar expressed concern about using
EFiling for the mere sake of liability if something prevented the filing
from making it through I guess.
Allen Jensen
Orange County Superior Court
Internet Development / EFiling
949.472.6946 Tel.
714.647.4805 Fax
>>> "Winters, Roger" <> 03/13/03 08:41AM >>>
At Tom's suggestion, I'll speak up about how the "Standards for
Electronic
Filing Processes" treats service of filings. In the section on "Court
Rules," "Standard 1.2A Service of Filings on Opposing Parties" (pages
34-35
of the February 26, 2003 version) identifies electronic service as an
"important incentive for lawyers' use of electronic filing." Further,
it
says "the efficiency of the legal process will be enhanced by having
service
performed by the electronic filing process."
The corresponding "Functional Standard 3.14: Service and Notice," (page
91)
in Subfunction 3.14.1 notes that providing this service is optional,
not
mandatory: "It is optional for each electronic filing system to provide
for
electronic notice and service. When a court opts for this
functionality, the
system must provide a proof of service record and a record of who is
served
electronically and who must still be served traditionally."
The document from which this information is taken can be found at
http://www.ncsconline.org/D_Tech/Standards/Standards.htm#ElectronicFilingPro
cesses
<http://www.ncsconline.org/D_Tech/Standards/Standards.htm#ElectronicFilingPr
ocesses> .
Though not directly involved with the group who have been developing
OXCI, I
will say I didn't expect OXCI to embody many, if any, of the optional
functions and processes, including the electronic service function.
This is
not to say it isn't as important as Rolly indicates. In fact, his
calling it
out helps me understand even more clearly how service and related
functions
(e.g., document exchanges not directly related to a filing) are
probably
going to be needed if we are to get substantial law firm participation
in
our e-filing systems.
Regards,
Roger
Roger Winters
Electronic Court Records Manager
King County
Department of Judicial Administration
516 Third Avenue, E-609 MS: KCC-JA-0609
Seattle, Washington 98104
V: (206) 296-7838 F: (206) 296-0906
