ILNews

Court: Slow start for optional e-filing

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Rehearing

Marion Superior Courts have fully implemented e-filing for civil collections and mortgage foreclosure cases, but law firms and attorneys are not en masse embracing the change that’s currently a voluntary choice.

Launched in May, the e-filing program being managed by LexisNexis File & Serve has seen about 6,103 total MF and CC cases filed as of the four-month mark Sept. 17, and 995 of those – or 16.3 percent – have been e-filed. Court administration estimates that about 1,900 cases will have been e-filed by year’s end.

But the court hopes that more attorneys and law firms will get involved, and court administrators say they are encouraged by the Indianapolis Bar Association’s enthusiasm about the project and free training being offered. Though the system is currently optional, those leading the Marion Superior project say it will likely become mandatory at some point.

This e-filing project is similar to one that also began earlier this year in Lake County, though that one involves an internally created court system. Similar systems have been implemented on a statewide basis in places like Colorado and Delaware, which have implemented either voluntary or mandatory e-filing.

The Indiana Supreme Court had approved local rules earlier this year allowing for the Marion Superior e-filing project. Those rules can be found at www.in.gov/judiciary/marion/docs/efiling021910.pdf.
 

Rehearing "2 county court systems get e-filing approval" IL March 31-April 13, 2010

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  2. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  3. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  4. I totally agree with John Smith.

  5. An idea that would harm the public good which is protected by licensing. Might as well abolish doctor and health care professions licensing too. Ridiculous. Unrealistic. Would open the floodgates of mischief and abuse. Even veteranarians are licensed. How has deregulation served the public good in banking, for example? Enough ideology already!

ADVERTISEMENT