The Florida E-Filing Portal has implemented several changes
to the website last week, of which one deserves emphasis.
When you upload your file, you now need to check the
appropriate button as shown here:
Note that the attorney must certify
compliance, regardless of whether the document is being e-filed by the attorney
or by his or her designee, so all attorneys must insure that the rules are
complied with before instructing their assistant to e-file.
Please recall that Rule 2.420(d) delineates court records
that are deemed confidential—and therefore cannot be filed. Rule 2.425 (a)
lists additional personal information—e.g., day and date of a birthday, social
security numbers, anything but the last four digits of a driver’s license,
etc.—that must not contained within a filed document.
The other changes to the portal are summarized in this
document.
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Thursday, October 24, 2013
Careful: Rule 2.514(b) does not apply to notices of appeal or petitions for writs!
The losing petitioner in Miccosukee Tribe v. Lewis, 38 Fla. L. Weekly
D2088 (Fla. 3rd DCA October 2, 2013), learned a lesson the hard way. The order at issue was an
order clarifying fact discovery deadlines. The petitioner filed a motion for
reconsideration, and after losing that and 35 days after the original order,
filed its petition.
1. The
petitioner argued that Judicial Administration Rule 2.514 (b) (“When a party may or must act within a specified time after service and service
is made by mail or e-mail, 5 days are added after the period that would
otherwise expire under subdivision (a)”) rendered the petition timely
since the order had been emailed. The Third District also rejected that
argument, noting that “[t]he additional five-day time period applies when
another rule requires a party to act within a
specified time after service.
Rule 2.514(b)
affords no additional time when a rule (in this
case rule 9.100(c)(1))
requires a party to act within a specified time after rendition of an order.”
n The petitioner also argued that its motion for reconsideration had tolled the time to petition. The court rejected that as well, explaining that an unauthorized motion for rehearing does NOT toll the time for appeal (or, as in this case, a petition for a writ of certiorari).
n The petitioner also argued that its motion for reconsideration had tolled the time to petition. The court rejected that as well, explaining that an unauthorized motion for rehearing does NOT toll the time for appeal (or, as in this case, a petition for a writ of certiorari).
Thursday, October 10, 2013
One eService question answered....
Yesterday, the Florida Supreme Court issued an
administrative order confirming that attorneys may relay on
the e-filing portal for e-service. The Court stated that additional
administrative orders will be forthcoming, so stay tuned for further
developments.
Wednesday, October 02, 2013
Unanswered questions about Florida eservice
As you know, the eservice function on the e-filing portal is up and running. Surprisingly, there does not seem to be an associated rule change or administrative order. The new service raises issues such as:
- Is there still a need to file a designation of email addresses, since it is now done online when filing?
- How should the language of the certificate of service be changed?
- What do we do if the email addresses for opposing parties online do not match the email addresses they provided in their designation?
Monday, September 30, 2013
IMPORTANT: STATE COURT E-FILING NOW INCLUDES E-SERVICE
The Florida e-filing site and e-filing emails look a little different today.
That’s because STATE
COURT E-FILING NOW INCORPORATES E-SERVICE. THIS MEANS THAT YOU NO LONGER HAVE
TO SERVE COURT DOCUMENTS BY EMAIL
(unless of course, you are dealing with a pro se party, or the document was not
filed). I have confirmed this with the Miami-Dade Clerk's Office, and a Florida Bar
article with more details is here.
There are several online training sessions available that I will distribute by separate email, but the process is pretty straightforward. Toward the end of the e-filing process you will see a screen similar to the screenshot below. If the email addresses in your e-filing profile are NOT the same ones you wish to use for e-service (e.g., if you have a paralegal working on a particular case that you want included), just type in the desired email addresses as indicated.
There are several online training sessions available that I will distribute by separate email, but the process is pretty straightforward. Toward the end of the e-filing process you will see a screen similar to the screenshot below. If the email addresses in your e-filing profile are NOT the same ones you wish to use for e-service (e.g., if you have a paralegal working on a particular case that you want included), just type in the desired email addresses as indicated.
Tuesday, June 04, 2013
Beginning July 1, 2013, the Third District will REQUIRE e-filing of all documents at its e-filing site, eDCA.
Beginning July 1, 2013, the Third District will REQUIRE e-filing of all documents at its e-filing site, eDCA. This is NOT the same site we have been using for the circuit and county courts.
Attorneys must register at eDCA to file documents and to receive orders from the court. The court began serving acknowledgement letters, orders, opinions, and mandates through eDCA on June 3, so you should register immediately and authorize the site to deliver those documents to you by e-mail. When you register, you should include your assistant’s email address as a secondary email so he or she receives all your appellate documents as well.
Even though e-filing will not be required until July 1, you MAY file all documents except briefs and petitions on eDCA now (after registering). (Before July 1, briefs and petitions should be e-mailed to 3dcaefiling@flcourts.org as usual per the old AO3D05-1. On and after July 1, briefs and petitions will be filed using the eDCA system.)
Attorneys and involved staff should review carefully the administrative orders issued last week, as well as the User’s Guide:
- Administrative Order 3D 13-02 RE: ELECTRONIC FILING OF NOTICES OF APPEAL BY LOWER TRIBUNAL CLERKS AND PAPERS AND MOTIONS BY COURT REPORTERS
- Administrative Order 3D 13-03 RE: E-MAIL SERVICE OF COURT DOCUMENTS AND E-FILING BY REGISTERED USERS OF eDCA
- Administrative Order 3D 13-04 RE: ELECTRONIC FILING OF APPELLATE RECORDS
- Administrative Order 3D 13-05 RE: ELECTRONIC FILING OF APPENDICES
Please don’t hesitate to ask if you have any questions.
Thursday, May 02, 2013
Reasonable seizure, unreasonable search
So held the Florida Supreme Court in Smallwood v. State, No. SC-1130 (Fla.. Sup. Ct. May 2, 2013). The court held that although police officers could seize a cellphone incident to an arrest, a search of the contents thereof required a warrant.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
