Summary
adopting rules to provide for mandatory electronic filing of documents through the Portal
Summary of this case from In re Amendments to Fla. Rule of Judicial Admin. 2.420Opinion
No. SC11–399.
2012-10-18
In re AMENDMENTS TO The FLORIDA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, The FLORIDA RULES OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION, The FLORIDA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, The FLORIDA PROBATE RULES, The FLORIDA SMALL CLAIMS RULES, The FLORIDA RULES OF JUVENILE PROCEDURE, The FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE, AND The FLORIDA FAMILY LAW RULES OF PROCEDURE—ELECTRONIC FILING.
Original Proceedings—The Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, The Florida Rules of Judicial Administration, The Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, The Florida Probate Rules, The Florida Small Claims Rules, The Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure, The Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, and The Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure. Kevin D. Johnson, Chair, Civil Procedure Rules Committee, Thompson, Sizemore, Gonzalez & Hearing, P.A., Tampa, FL; John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, FL and Keith H. Park, Chair, Rules of Judicial Administration Committee, West Palm Beach, FL; Donald E. Scaglione, Chair, Criminal Procedure Rules Committee, Brooksville, FL; John C. Moran, Co–Chair, Probate Rules Committee, Gunster, Yoakley & Stewart, P.A., West Palm Beach, FL and Tasha K. Pepper–Dickinson, Co–Chair, Probate Rules Committee, Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A., West Palm Beach, FL; Judson L. Cohen, Chair, Small Claims Rules Committee, Cohen Law Offices, Miami, FL; Joel M. Silvershein, Chair, Juvenile Court Rules Committee, Office of State Attorney, Fort Lauderdale, FL; Jamie B. Moses, Chair, Appellate Court Rules Committee, Fisher, Rushmer, et al., Orlando, FL; Ashley McCorvey Myers, Chair, Family Law Rules Committee, McCorvey & Myers, Jacksonville, FL, for Petitioners. Teresa L. Prince and Edward A. Dion, Nabors, Giblin & Nickerson, P.A., Tallahassee, FL; Honorable R.B. “Chips” Shore, Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller, Manatee County, Bradenton, FL; Honorable Judith L. Kreeger, Chair, Florida Courts Technology Commission, Miami, FL; Lynn M. Hoshihara and Robert Rivas, Sachs, Sax, & Caplan, Tallahassee, FL; Kenneth A. Kent, Executive Director, Florida Association of Court Clerks and Comptrollers, Tallahassee, FL; George J. Meyer, Chair, Real Property Probate and Trust Law Section of The Florida Bar, Carlton Fields, P.A., Tampa, FL; John A. Tomasino, Administrative Director, Public Defender's Office, Second Judicial Circuit, Tallahassee, FL; Arthur I. Jacobs, Richard J. Scholz, and Yvonne R. Mizeras of Jabobs, Scholz & Associates, LLC, Fernandina Beach, FL, Responding with comments.
Original Proceedings—The Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, The Florida Rules of Judicial Administration, The Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, The Florida Probate Rules, The Florida Small Claims Rules, The Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure, The Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, and The Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure.
Kevin D. Johnson, Chair, Civil Procedure Rules Committee, Thompson, Sizemore, Gonzalez & Hearing, P.A., Tampa, FL; John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, FL and Keith H. Park, Chair, Rules of Judicial Administration Committee, West Palm Beach, FL; Donald E. Scaglione, Chair, Criminal Procedure Rules Committee, Brooksville, FL; John C. Moran, Co–Chair, Probate Rules Committee, Gunster, Yoakley & Stewart, P.A., West Palm Beach, FL and Tasha K. Pepper–Dickinson, Co–Chair, Probate Rules Committee, Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A., West Palm Beach, FL; Judson L. Cohen, Chair, Small Claims Rules Committee, Cohen Law Offices, Miami, FL; Joel M. Silvershein, Chair, Juvenile Court Rules Committee, Office of State Attorney, Fort Lauderdale, FL; Jamie B. Moses, Chair, Appellate Court Rules Committee, Fisher, Rushmer, et al., Orlando, FL; Ashley McCorvey Myers, Chair, Family Law Rules Committee, McCorvey & Myers, Jacksonville, FL, for Petitioners. Teresa L. Prince and Edward A. Dion, Nabors, Giblin & Nickerson, P.A., Tallahassee, FL; Honorable R.B. “Chips” Shore, Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller, Manatee County, Bradenton, FL; Honorable Judith L. Kreeger, Chair, Florida Courts Technology Commission, Miami, FL; Lynn M. Hoshihara and Robert Rivas, Sachs, Sax, & Caplan, Tallahassee, FL; Kenneth A. Kent, Executive Director, Florida Association of Court Clerks and Comptrollers, Tallahassee, FL; George J. Meyer, Chair, Real Property Probate and Trust Law Section of The Florida Bar, Carlton Fields, P.A., Tampa, FL; John A. Tomasino, Administrative Director, Public Defender's Office, Second Judicial Circuit, Tallahassee, FL; Arthur I. Jacobs, Richard J. Scholz, and Yvonne R. Mizeras of Jabobs, Scholz & Associates, LLC, Fernandina Beach, FL, Responding with comments.
PARIENTE, J.
Consistent with the orders entered in this case on August 14, 2012, and October 9, 2012, the opinion dated June 21, 2012, is withdrawn and this revised opinion is substituted in its place.
In this case, the Court adopts proposed amendments to the Florida rules of court to implement mandatory electronic filing procedures for all documents filed in Florida'scourts.
The proposed amendments represent a significant and important step toward our goal of a fully electronic court system by transitioning from permissive to mandatory electronic filing (e-filing). Also in furtherance of this goal, in a separate, related case we adopt amendments to the rules of court to require e-mail service of pleadings and documents between parties, and we have coordinated the dates on which those rules will become effective so that e-mail service will serve as a first step in preparing practitioners to function in an electronic environment. See In re Amends. to Fla. Rules of Jud. Admin., Fla. Rules of Civ. Pro., Fla. Rules of Crim. Pro., Fla. Probate Rules, Fla. Rules of Traffic Court, Fla. Small Claims Rules, Fla. Rules of Juv. Pro., Fla. Rules of App. Pro., and Fla. Family Law Rules of Pro.—E–mail Service Rule, No. SC10–2101 (Fla.2012) ( In re E–mail Service Rule ).
We have jurisdiction. Seeart. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const.
Mandatory electronic filing is also another of the necessary steps in our ongoing efforts to provide the public with electronic access to nonconfidential court records.
E-mail service will be mandatory for attorneys practicing in the civil, probate, small claims, and family law divisions of the trial courts, as well as in all appellate cases, before electronic filing is mandatory. E-mail service will be mandatory for attorneys practicing in the criminal, traffic, and juvenile divisions of the trial courts on the same date that electronic filing also becomes mandatory for this group. See id. slip op. at 9.
As a necessary prerequisite to providing the public with electronic access to court records, we recently adopted rule amendments that reduce the amount of extraneous personal information in court records. See In re Implementation of Comm. on Privacy & Court Records Recommendations—Amends. to Fla. Rules of Civ. Pro.; Fla. Rules of Jud. Admin.; Fla. Rules of Crim. Pro.; Fla. Probate Rules; Fla. Small Claims Rules; Fla. Rules of App. Pro.; Fla. Family Law Rules of Pro., 78 So.3d 1045 (Fla.2011). We also adopted procedures that allow the clerks of court to more easily identify and screen from the public confidential information filed with the court and procedures for sealing and unsealing court records. See In re Amends. to Fla. Rule of Jud. Admin. 2.420 & Fla. Rules of App. Pro., 31 So.3d 756 (Fla.2010).
The new rules and amendments to the existing rules at issue in this case will require attorneys to file documents with the trial and appellate courts by electronic transmission and will operate in tandem with the new mandatory e-mail service requirements for pleadings and documents. The proposed amendments will also require the clerks' offices to maintain electronic court records, to convert paper documents to electronic documents, and to electronically transmit the record on appeal.
Because we recognize that the mandatory electronic filing requirements the Court adopts require that each clerk have the capacity to accept and maintain the documents electronically and will change the way that attorneys file documents, the Court has adopted an implementation schedule to phase in these requirements in each division of the trial courts and in the appellate courts based on input from all affected groups.
The Court also recognizesthat while those attorneys practicing in the civil divisions of the trial courts and in the appellate courts would like implementation to begin immediately, those attorneys who work for the public defenders, state attorneys, and regional counsel are operating under decreasing budgets so that while e-filing and e-mail service will increase efficiency in the long run, resources to upgrade technology and train personnel are largely unavailable.
The implementation schedule is based on recommendations and input from the Florida Courts Technology Commission and the Florida Courts E–Filing Authority. This schedule may change after the Court considers the report from the E–Filing Authority addressing the status of the statewide e-portal, and the response from the Florida Courts Technology Commission, requested on September 19, 2012. In re Amends. to Fla. Rules of Civ. Pro., Fla. Rules of Jud. Admin., Fla. Rules of Crim. Pro., Fla. Probate Rules, Fla. Small Claims Rules, Fla. Rules of Juv. Pro., Fla. Rules of App. Pro., & Fla. Family Law Rules of Pro.—Electronic Filing, No. SC11–399 (Fla. order entered Sept. 19, 2012).
We take this opportunity, however, to encourage attorneys and clerks throughout Florida to take notice of the new electronic filing requirements that we adopt here and to begin the process of updating their current practices to conform to these requirements. In this regard, The Florida Bar, in coordination with the Florida Association of Court Clerks and Comptrollers (FACC), should undertake comprehensive educational outreach so that litigants and clerks are fully informed of the requirements and the substantial benefits of mandatory e-filing. As the Legislature has indicated, implementation of an electronic filing process should reduce costs, increase timeliness in the processing of cases, and provide the judiciary with case-related information to allow for improved case management. See§ 28.22205, Fla. Stat. (2011).
Also, as explained in this opinion, in adopting the mandatory e-filing rules, the Court has exempted self-represented parties and self-represented nonparties, including nonparty governmental or public agencies. However, we strongly encourage these individuals and entities to take advantage of the e-filing procedures, which should produce cost savings and efficiency for all those involved with the justice system by eliminating mailing and copying costs.
BACKGROUND
History of Electronic Transmission of Court Records in Florida Courts
The judicial branch of Florida has long embraced the use of technology to increase the effectiveness, efficiency, and accessibility of the courts.
We first adopted rules authorizing an early form of electronic transmission for documents filed with the courts more than three decades ago, in 1979. See In re Fla. Rules of Jud. Admin., 372 So.2d 449, 463 (Fla.1979) (adopting Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.090 (Electronic Filing of Matters in all Proceedings Within the State Courts System), providing that any document may be filed with the court by an “electronic copying device”) (later renumbered Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.525).
See generally In re Statewide Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC09–30, at 1 (July 1, 2009); Amends. to Rules of Jud. Admin.—Rule 2.090—Electronic Transmission & Filing of Documents, 681 So.2d 698 (Fla.1996).
Since that time, we have continued to amend and revise these rules to accommodate new technology. See, e.g., Amends. to Rules of Jud. Admin.—Rule 2.090—Electronic Transmission & Filing of Documents, 681 So.2d 698 (Fla.1996); Amends. to Rules of Jud. Admin.—Rule 2.090—Electronic Transmission & Filing of Documents, and Rule 2.060—Attorneys, 701 So.2d 1164 (Fla.1997). In our 1996 opinion amending the electronic filing rule, we observed that the judicial branch was rapidly moving into the information age, and that amendments to the rules of court were necessary to establish “a proper and efficient process for the filing and maintenanceof court records” in this new age. Amends. to Rules of Jud. Admin.—Rule 2.090—Electronic Transmission & Filing of Documents, 681 So.2d at 699. We noted there:
See In re Amends. to Fla. Rules of Jud. Admin.—Reorganization of the Rules, 939 So.2d 966 (Fla.2006) (renaming and renumbering rule 2.090 (Electronic Filing of Matters in all Proceedings Within the State Courts System) as rule 2.525 (Electronic Filing)).
As the head of the judicial branch, this Court has the exclusive responsibility for determining how records in the court system are filed and maintained. In carrying out that responsibility, we must ensure that the processes for the filing and maintenance of judicial records by electronic means are compatible, accessible, and cost efficient.
Id. (citations omitted).
Currently, Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.525 (Electronic Filing) is permissive and provides that all documents that are court records may be filed with the clerk by electronic transmission provided that the clerk has the ability to accept and retain electronic documents, the clerk or the chief judge of the circuit has requested permission to accept documents filed by electronic transmission, and this Court has entered an order allowing the clerk to accept documents electronically.
SeeFla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.525(c)(1). Under these procedures, a number of trial courts have adopted plans for electronic filing in some or all divisions, and this Court has approved such plans. See, e.g., In re Electronic Transmission and Filing of Documents Under Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.090 for Manatee County, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC01–4 (Jan. 26, 2001); In re Electronic Transmission and Filing of Documents Under Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.090 for Orange County, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC05–2 (Feb. 2, 2005); In re Electronic Transmission & Filing of Documents Under Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.525 for Broward County, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC07–19 (Apr. 23, 2007); In re Electronic Transmission and Filing of Documents Under Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.525 for Calhoun, Gulf, Holmes, Jackson, and Washington Counties, in the Fourteenth Judicial Circuit, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC10–20 (May 5, 2010).
In In re Amendments to Florida Rules of Judicial Administration—Rule 2.236, 41 So.3d 128 (Fla.2010), we adopted new Rule of Judicial Administration 2.236 (Florida Courts Technology Commission), which authorized the Florida Courts Technology Commission to review and approve applications for new court technology systems and modifications to existing systems to ensure compliance with standards adopted by the Court.
As a result, many trial courts are already accepting documents filed by electronic transmission. The First District Court of Appeal is also accepting documents filed electronically. See Letter of Approval from Judge Judith L. Kreeger, Chair of the Florida Courts Technology Commission, to Judge Robert T. Benton, Chief Judge of the First District Court of Appeal (Feb. 11, 2011).
The Florida Courts Technology Commission, in its Supplemental Comment in this case, indicated that all 67 counties in Florida have received approval of their plans for electronic filing in some or all divisions of their trial courts. At the time the comment was filed, the clerk's offices in 16 counties had begun to receive documents filed through the statewide e-portal. See infra p. 11, note 9 (discussing statewide e-portal).
Our efforts to transition to a fully electronic court system have been supported by the Florida Legislature. In section 28.22205, Florida Statutes (2011), the Legislature has directed:
Each clerk of court shall implement an electronic filing process. The purpose of the electronic filing process is to reduce judicial costs in the office of the clerk and the judiciary, increase timeliness in the processing of cases, and provide the judiciary with case-related informationto allow for improved judicial case management. The Legislature requests that, no later than July 1, 2009, the Supreme Court set statewide standards for electronic filing to be used by the clerks of court to implement electronic filing.
In response to this request to the Court, we promptly adopted the Florida Supreme Court Statewide Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts, to provide uniform standards for the electronic transmission of documents and court records. See In re Statewide Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC09–30 (July 1, 2009). In adopting those standards, we noted, “[T]he transition of Florida's courts from paper-based information management to systems that rely primarily on digital records represents a fundamental change in the internal operations of the courts. Accordingly, care must be taken to ensure that this transformation is accomplished in a deliberate and responsible manner.” Id. at 1. The new rules and amendments to existing rules we adopt represent an important step in this ongoing effort to change the ways that the judicial system operates from a paper world to an electronic world. In that effort, the Court keeps at the forefront that our court system must be accessible, fair, and effective.
This Case
The proposals at issue in this case were submitted in response to a request from this Court asking the ten Florida Bar rules committees to propose amendments to the rules of court necessary to implement the recommendations of the Appellate Court Technology Committee (ACTC), approved by the Court in In re Interim Policy on Electronic Appellate Court Records, Fla. Admin. Order AOSC10–32 (June 29, 2010). See Letter from Thomas D. Hall, Clerk of the Florida Supreme Court, to the Chairs of the Florida Bar Rules Committees (Aug. 4, 2010) (on file with the Court in Case No. SC11–399). In the administrative order approving the recommendations, the Court adopted an interim policy that any court records of proceedings in a lower tribunal made or maintained in electronic form should be accepted by appellate courts as part of the record on appeal. See In re Interim Policy on Electronic Appellate Court Records, Fla. Admin. Order AOSC10–32, at 2. The interim policy also directed attorneys to file documents in this Court and in the district courts of appeal in a digital format, as well as on paper; however, when feasible, the policy stated that the Chief Justice of this Court or the chief judge of any district court may dispense with the requirement to file paper copies. Id. at 3. Although the ACTC's recommendations and the interim policy adopted by the Court pertained specifically to appellate proceedings, we requested that the committees consider them in a broader context and recommend amendments to accommodate electronic court records and procedures for electronic filing of those records in all types of cases. See Letter from Thomas D. Hall, Clerk of the Florida Supreme Court, to the Chairs of the Florida Bar Rules Committees at 3.
In response to our request, the committees filed a joint report in February 2011, with recommendations to amend the Florida rules of court to provide mandatory electronic filing procedures. SeeFla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.140(f). The Executive Committee of The Florida Bar Board of Governors unanimously approved the proposed rule amendments.
The Court published the proposals in The Florida Bar News for comment. Several organizations and members of the Bar filed comments. The committees filed a joint response to the comments and the Criminal Procedure Rules Committee (CPR Committee) filed a separate response to the specific comments that addressed its proposal to amend Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.030 (Service of Pleadings and Papers). Additionally, at the Court's direction the Florida Courts Technology Commission (FCTC), in consultation with the Florida Courts E–Filing Authority (E–Filing Authority) and the FACC, submitted a supplemental comment proposing a plan to phase in mandatory electronic filing under the new rules. Several groups filed comments on the proposed plan. The E–Filing Authority filed a supplemental comment to update the Court as to the status of each trial and appellate court clerk's technological readiness to receive documents electronically filed through the statewide e-portal.
The statewide e-portal is intended to be a statewide access point for electronic access and transmission of court records to and from the Florida courts. As conceived, all filers of court records, lawyers and nonlawyers, would use the e-portal for secure electronic access to the court, including electronic filing. The e-portal will be capable of accepting electronic filings from multiple sources, using common data elements passing to and from each local case system. See Florida Supreme Court Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts, Sec. 2.0 (adopted in In re Statewide Standards for Electronic Access to the Courts, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC09–30) (Version 7.0 Adopted modifications, Feb. 2012, found on this court's website at: http:// www. flcourts. org/ gen_ public/ technology/ e- filing info status. shtml). In the implementation plan originally proposed by the FCTC, FACC, and the E–Filing Authority, it was anticipated that all trial court clerks would be prepared to accept documents filed electronically through the statewide e-portal in the civil divisions on July 1, 2012. The E–Filing Authority now reports that there are several counties that will not be able to accept electronic filings on that date, primarily due to a lack of resources and the requirements for system conversions, which vary from county to county.
In considering these proposals, the Court determined that the timing for the implementation of mandatory e-filing should be coordinated with the timing for mandatory e-mail service. After the oral argument in In re E–mail Service Rule and this case, the Court determined that certain aspects of these cases warranted further examination. Accordingly, we directed the Rules of Judicial Administration Committee (RJA Committee) and the FCTC to convene a workgroup
to address and file a joint supplemental report addressing three specific areas of concern:
The Court's order indicated that the workgroup should include, but not be limited to, representatives from the Criminal Procedure Rules Committee, the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association, the Florida Public Defender Association, and the FACC.
1. The Court has determined that the list of proposed exemptions from electronic filing in criminal cases is too broad. The workgroup should develop a revised proposal narrowing that list. In light of the fact that any document required by a Florida Statute to be filed in paper format will be exempted under proposed Rule of Judicial Administration 2.525(d), the workgroup also should address whether specific exemptions in criminal cases are, in fact, necessary.
2. The workgroup should address whether non-parties, especially “institutional” non-parties such as the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the Florida Department of Corrections, should be required to file documents electronically. If it is determined that electronic filing by certain non-parties should be required at this time, the workgroup should propose appropriate rule amendments.
3. The workgroup should address how the phase-in schedule for electronic filing suggested by FCTC in case no. SC11–399, will impact the implementationof the mandatory electronic service rules proposed in case no. SC10–2101. In particular, the workgroup should consider whether the deadlines set out in the proposed phase-in schedule for mandatory electronic filing also should apply in implementing mandatory electronic service.
The RJA Committee and the FCTC filed a supplemental report that addressed the Court's concerns and suggested revisions to its original rule proposals. With regard to the issue of “institutional” nonparties, the workgroup indicated that it spoke with a number of institutional nonparty groups (including the Department of Corrections, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Guardian ad Litem programs, the Department of Children and Families, and the Department of Juvenile Justice) and learned that these groups were generally in favor of electronic filing, whenever possible. However, the workgroup concluded that these nonparties should not be required to file documents electronically at this time. There were no comments addressed to the supplemental report.
After considering the original joint report, the comments filed, the issues discussed at oral argument, and the revised rule proposals in the supplemental report, we adopt the proposed amendments with some minor modifications. We also adopt amendments to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516, which were not proposed by the committees. We discuss some of the more significant amendments below. We also provide an implementation schedule, based on recommendations and input from the FCTC and the E–Filing Authority.
AMENDMENTS
Rules of Judicial Administration 2.520 (Documents) and 2.525 (Electronic Filing)
Central to the new mandatory electronic filing procedures are Florida Rules of Judicial Administration 2.520 (Documents) and 2.525 (Electronic Filing). Both rules govern the filing of any document that is a “court record,” as defined by Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.430(a)(1).
Rule 2.520 provides in general terms that all documents filed in any court shall be filed by electronic transmission in accordance with rule 2.525. In turn, rule 2.525 provides the specific procedures for electronic filing.
.Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.430(a)(1) defines the term “court records” as:
[T]he contents of the court file, including the progress docket and other similar records generated to document activity in a case, transcripts filed with the clerk, documentary exhibits in the custody of the clerk, and electronic records, videotapes, or stenographic tapes of depositions or other proceedings filed with the clerk, and electronic records, videotapes or stenographic tapes of court proceedings.
First, subdivision (a) (Definition) of rule 2.525 provides an updated definition for the term “electronic transmission of documents” to include the sending of information by electronic signals to, by, or from a court or clerk, which when received can be transformed and stored or transmitted on paper, microfilm, magnetic storage device, optical imaging system, CD–ROM, flash drive, other electronic data storage system, server, case maintenance system, electronic court filing system, statewide or local electronic portal (e-portal), or other electronic record-keeping system authorized by this Court. The rule as amended recognizes the clerk's role in converting documents filed in paper form into an electronic format. Subdivision (a) also providesthat the electronic transmission of documents includes filing documents by e-mail or any internet-based transmission procedure.
Next, subdivision (b) (Application) provides that all procedures, programs, and standards for electronic filing must comply with current e-filing standards promulgated by this Court in In re Statewide Standards for Electronic Access to the Court, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC09–30, or any subsequent administrative order.
Subdivisions (c) (Documents Affected) and (d) (Exceptions) set forth the specific processes for electronic filing. Subdivision (c) requires all documents that are court records to be filed with the court by electronic transmission. Indeed, the official court file will now consist of a set of electronic documents stored in a computer system maintained by the clerk, together with any supplemental nonelectronic documents or materials otherwise authorized under the rule.
Subdivision (d) allows only limited exceptions to the mandatory electronic filing requirement: (1) when the clerk does not have the ability to accept and retain documents by electronic filing; (2) when the filer of the document is a self-represented party or a self-represented nonparty, including a nonparty governmental or public agency (or an agency, partnership, corporation, or business entity acting on behalf of any governmental or public agency);
Under amended rule 2.525(c)(3), the documents contained in the official court file are deemed “original” documents for all purposes.
(3) when the filer is an attorney excused from e-mail service, pursuant to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516;
Amended rule 2.525(d)(2) provides that any self-represented nonparty that is a governmental or public agency (or any other agency, partnership, corporation, or business entity acting on behalf of any governmental or public agency) may, but is not required to, file documents by electronic transmission. We direct the RJA Committee, with input from the FCTC, to monitor the progress of electronic filing by nonparty governmental or public agencies and file a report with the Court by July 1, 2013, advising whether this exemption is still necessary. If the RJA Committee determines that the exemption is not necessary it should propose appropriate rule amendments.
(4) when submitting evidentiary exhibits or filing nondocumentary materials; (5) when the filing involves documents in excess of 25 megabytes in size (in which case the documents may be transmitted to the court using an electronic storage medium); (6) when the document is filed in open court; (7) when paper filing is permitted by any approved state or local electronic filing procedure; or (8) when a court determines that justice so requires.
In In re E–mail Service Rule, we adopt new Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516 (Service of Pleadings and Documents), which requires attorneys to serve documents by e-mail. Pursuant to subdivision (b)(1)(B) of the new rule, attorneys may file a motion to be excused from mandatory e-mail service, demonstrating that the attorney has no e-mail account and lacks access to the Internet at his or her office. See id., No. SC10–2101, slip op. at 5.
Significantly, whenever a filer submits a paper document to the clerk under one of the exceptions listed above, subdivision (c)(4) of the amended rule requires the clerk's office to immediately convert the document to an electronic document. In this way, rule 2.525 ensures that nearly all documents filed in a case, even those submitted in a paper format, will be included in the electronic record. Filers may provide a self-addressed, postage-paid envelope so that the clerk's office may return paper documents after they have been converted to an electronic form. Except in cases where a paper document is required to be maintained, the clerk may recycle any paper document that is not returned to the filer.
Subdivision (e) (Service) authorizes a court or clerk to use electronic transmission to serve all orders, pursuant to rule 2.516(h).
Additionally, this subdivision requires that any document filed electronically with the court or clerk must also be served on all parties and interested persons in accordance with the applicable rules of court.
As adopted in In re E–mail Service Rule,rule 2.516(h) provides that a copy of all orders or judgments must be transmitted by the court or under its direction to all parties at the time of entry of the order or judgment. The court may choose to serve any order or judgment by e-mail to all attorneys who have not been excused from e-mail service and to all parties not represented by an attorney who have designated an e-mail address for service. See In re E–mail Service Rule, No. SC10–2101, slip op. at 7.
Finally, subdivision (f) (Administration) provides guidance to the clerks in administering the electronic filing rules. It requires that the clerks' offices across the state provide electronic access to their equipment, whether through the e-portal or otherwise, during regular business hours; accept electronic transmission of documents up to 25 megabytes in size; and accept documents greater than 25 megabytes on an electronic storage device, such as a CD–ROM or flash drive. Also under subdivision (f), the filing date for any document that is electronically transmitted to the clerk will be the date and time that such filing is acknowledged by an electronic stamp, pursuant to an approved electronic filing procedure, or the date that the last page of the filing is received by the clerk.
Conforming Amendments to the Rules of Procedure
We also adopt new rules and amendments to existing rules to conform the rules of procedure to the electronic filing requirements in amended rules 2.520 and 2.525.
The most controversial of the conforming amendments were those proposed to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.030 (Service and Filing of Pleadings, Papers, and Documents). As originally proposed, the CPR Committee recommended that rule 3.030 be amended to authorize a number of exceptions to the mandatory electronic filing requirement in criminal cases, including charging documents, indictments, informations, petitions, affidavits, plea agreements, documents filed under seal, ex parte documents, and any documents which are required to be sworn or notarized. The Court received several comments addressed to this proposal. The commenters asserted that the CPR Committee's proposed amendments would exempt nearly all documents filed in a criminal case from the electronic filing requirement and force the clerks of court to maintain two filing systems, one electronic and one paper.
As discussed above, following the oral argument in this case, we directed the RJA Committee and the FCTC to convene a workgroup to address several areas of concern to the Court. One such concern was that the list of proposed exceptions to electronic filing in criminal cases was too broad, and we directed the workgroup to reconsider and revise the list. See Order of Dec. 6, 2011. The workgroup, which included representatives from the CPR Committee, ultimately concluded that current Florida law requires two types of documents be preserved in their paper form. These are verified and sworn documents and original paper judgments and sentences. However, the workgroup also noted that pursuant to amended rule 2.525, these documents will be included in the electronic court file in one of two ways—either when the filer transmits an electronic copy of the paper document to the clerk or, alternatively, when the clerk converts a paper filing into an electronic format. In either case, the original paper document would be deposited with the clerk and maintained for safekeeping.
Consistent with the workgroup's recommendations, amended rule 3.030 provides that all documents in a criminal case must be filed in accordance with Florida Rules of Judicial Administration 2.520 and 2.525. However, any paper document that is a judgment and sentence, or is required by statute or rule to be sworn to or notarized, shall be filed and then deposited with the clerk immediately thereafter.
Additionally, as suggested by the Probate Rules Committee, we amend the Florida Probate Rules to include new rule 5.043 (Deposit of Wills and Codicils), which provides that any original, executed will or codicil that is deposited with the clerk
must be retained by the clerk in its original form for twenty years, regardless of whether the will or codicil was “permanently recorded” under amended Rule of Judicial Administration 2.430.
Pursuant to Florida law, original wills are “deposited” with the clerk of court having venue over the decedent's estate, rather than “filed.” See§ 732.901(1), Fla. Stat. (2011).
.Rule 2.430(a)(3) defines the phrase “permanently recorded” to mean that a document has been microfilmed, optically imaged, or recorded onto an electronic record-keeping system in accordance with standards adopted by the Supreme Court of Florida.
The Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure are also amended, consistent with the interim policy we adopted in In re Interim Policy on Electronic Appellate Court Records, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC10–32, to accommodate electronic notices of appeal; to describe the contents, formatting, and organization of the electronic record on appeal; and to direct the clerks to electronically transmit the record to the appellate court.
Finally, we have revised the proposed amendments to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.080 (Service of Pleadings, Orders, and Documents) to expressly state that all documents shall be filed with the court in accordance with the requirements of Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.525. On our own accord, we also amend Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516 (Service of Pleadings and Documents) to provide that the filing of documents with the court must be made by filing them with the clerk pursuant to rule 2.525.
The remaining conforming amendments are adopted as proposed by the rules committees.
We have also revised the Juvenile Court Rules Committee's proposed new rule 8.004 (Electronic Filing), subdivision (c), to be consistent with Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.525(d).
IMPLEMENTATION
As explained, because of the importance of an orderly process for implementation of the new e-filing requirements, we have adopted an implementation schedule based on the recommendations of the FCTC and the E–Filing Authority and based on input as to the unique challenges facing each division or court. For example, although the FCTC reported that all 67 clerks of court would be prepared to accept e-filings through the statewide e-portal in the civil divisions by July 1, 2012, the subsequent filing by the E–Filing Authority indicated several clerks were experiencing difficulties that would prevent them from accepting electronic filings on that date. The new, mandatory electronic filing procedures that the Court adopts will be implementedaccording to this schedule, except as may be otherwise provided by subsequent administrative order.
The FCTC and the E–Filing Authority have urged the Court to adopt a limited waiver process for any attorney or clerk who cannot comply with mandatory electronic filing for good cause. Accordingly, any clerk may submit a request with this Court to delay the effective date of these rules in any division or court. If the request is granted, an Administrative Order will be issued, which will be published on this Court's website and on the requesting court's website. Additionally, we request that the RJA Committee, in consultation with the FCTC and the E–Filing Authority, consider whether any additional waiver procedures are necessary for attorneys or clerks. If the RJA Committee determines that a further waiver process is necessary, it may propose appropriate procedures.
First, the new electronic filing requirements the Court adopts will become effective in the civil, probate, small claims, and family law divisions of the trial courts, as well as for appeals to the circuit courts in these categories of cases, on April 1, 2013, at 12:01 a.m., except as may be otherwise provided by administrative order. Electronic filing will be mandatory in these divisions pursuant to rule 2.525 on that date. However, until the new rules take effect in these divisions, any clerk who is already accepting documents filed by electronic transmission under the current rules should continue to do so; attorneys in these counties are encouraged to file documents electronically under the current rules.
Next, the new electronic filing requirements the Court adopts will become effective in the criminal, traffic, and juvenile
divisions of the trial courts, as well as for appeals to the circuit court in these categories of cases, on October 1, 2013, at 12:01 a.m., except as may be otherwise provided by administrative order. Electronic filing will be mandatory in these divisions under rule 2.525 on that date. The new e-filing requirements, as they apply in proceedings brought pursuant to the Florida Mental Health Act (Baker Act), Chapter 394, Part I, Florida Statutes, and the Involuntary Commitment of Sexually Violent Predators Act (Jimmy Ryce), Chapter 394, Part V, Florida Statutes, will also not be mandatory in these cases until October 1, 2013.
This includes juvenile delinquency proceedings, dependency and termination of parental rights proceedings, and proceedings for families and children in need of services.
As stated above, until the new rules take effect in these divisions and proceedings, any clerk who is already accepting electronically filed documents under the current rules should continue to do so; attorneys are again encouraged to utilize existing electronic filing procedures under the current rules.
The RJA Committee should review whether any changes to the rules of procedure are necessary to accommodate e-filing in Baker Act proceedings. Similarly, the Criminal Court Steering Committee, together with the RJA Committee, should review whether any changes to the rules are necessary to accommodate e-filing in Jimmy Ryce proceedings. If these committees determine that rule amendments are necessary, they may file proposed rule amendments with the Court.
The new electronic filing procedures adopted in this case will become effective in this Court on December 1, 2012, at 12:01 a.m., except as may be otherwise provided by administrative order. E-filing will be mandatory in this Court under rule 2.525 on that date. Additionally, the e-filing rules will become effective and mandatory in the district courts of appeal on April 1, 2013, at 12:01 a.m. However, until the new rules and procedures take effect in the district courts, any clerk who is already accepting documents filed by electronic transmission may continue to do so; attorneys in these districts are encouraged to file documents electronically. Clerks will not be required to electronically transmit the record on appeal until July 1, 2013, at 12:01 a.m. Until July 1, we encourage clerks, whenever possible, to electronically transmit the record under the new rules and requirements.
This is consistent with Court's interim policy on the transmission of electronic records adopted in In re Interim Policy on Electronic Appellate Court Records, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC10–32.
Finally, we note that, in all types of cases, pursuant to amended rule 2.525(d) self-represented parties and self-represented nonparties, including nonparty governmental or public agencies, and attorneys excused from e-mail service under Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516 will be permitted, but not required, to file documents electronically.
CONCLUSION
We would like to thank each of The Florida Bar rules committees and the Florida Courts Technology Commission, formerly headed by Judge Judith Kreeger, for their thorough and diligent work proposing comprehensive procedures for the electronic filing of court documents and a structured plan to phase in the new requirements. We also wish to thank those who submitted comments in this matter, including the E–Filing Authority, for their valuable input. We are especially appreciative of the cooperation from the Clerks of Court, who, in cooperation with the Court, understand the importance of the steps that are undertaken that will prove valuable to litigants and essential to the efficient, effective, and fair administration of justice. These collective efforts have assisted the Court in taking a significant and critical step toward our goal of a fully electronic court system.
Accordingly, we amend the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration, the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Florida Probate Rules, the Florida Small Claims Rules, the Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure, the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, and the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure as set forth in the appendix to this opinion.
New language is indicated by underscoring; deletions are indicated by struck-through type. The committee notes are offered for explanation only and are not adopted as an official part of the rules. The amendments shall become effective as provided in this opinion.
The rules as shown in the appendix reflect amendments made in In re Amends. to Fla. Family Law Rules of Pro., 95 So.3d 126 (Fla.2012), which become effective October 1, 2012, at 12:01 a.m.
It is so ordered. POLSTON, C.J., and LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.
APPENDIX
FLORIDA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
RULE 1.030. NONVERIFICATION OF PLEADINGS
Except when otherwise specifically provided by these rules or an applicable statute, every pleading or other written document of a party represented by an attorney need not be verified or accompanied by an affidavit. paper
Committee Notes
[No Change]
RULE 1.080. SERVICE AND FILING OF PLEADINGS, ORDERS, AND DOCUMENTS
(a) Service. Every pleading subsequent to the initial pleading , all orders, and every other document filed in the action must be served in conformity with the requirements of Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516.
(b) Filing. All documents shall be filed in conformity with the requirements of Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.525.
(c) Writing and written defined. Writing or written means a document containing information, an application, or a stipulation.
FLORIDA RULES OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION
RULE 2.430. RETENTION OF COURT RECORDS
(a) [No Change]
(b) Permanently Recorded Records.
IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
____________________
Movant
RULE 2.516 SERVICE OF PLEADINGS AND DOCUMENTS
(a)–(d) [No Change]
(e) Filing Defined. The filing of documents with the court as required by these rules must be made by filing them with the clerk in accordance with rule 2.525, except that the judge may permit documents to be filed with the judge, in which event the judge must note the filing date before him or her on the documents and transmit them to the clerk. The date of filing is that shown on the face of the document by the judge's notation or the clerk's time stamp, whichever is earlier.
(f)–(h) [No Change]
RULE 2.520. PAPER DOCUMENTS
(a) Electronic Filing Mandatory. All Type and Size documents filed in any court shall be filed by electronic transmission in accordance with rule 2.525. “Documents” means pleadings, motions, petitions, memoranda, briefs, notices, exhibits, declarations, affidavits, orders, judgments, decrees, writs, opinions, and any other paper or writing submitted to a court. pleadings, motions, petitions, briefs, notices, orders, judgments, decrees, opinions, and other papers and official
(b) Type and Size. Documents subject to the exceptions set forth in rule 2.525(d) shall be filed on recycled paper measuring 8 1/2 by 11 inches. For purposes of this rule, paper is recycled if it contains a minimum content of 50 percent waste paper. Xerographic reduction of legal-size (8 1/2 by 14 inches) documents to letter size (8 1/2 by 11 inches) is prohibited. All other documents filed by electronic transmission shall be filed in a format capable of being printed in a format consistent with the provisions of this rule.
( c ) Exhibits. Any exhibit or attachment filed with pleadings or papers may be filed in its original size. b
( d ) Recording Space. On all papers and documents prepared and filed by the court or by any party to a proceeding which are to be recorded in the public records of any county, including but not limited to final money judgments and notices of lis pendens, a 3–inch by 3–inch space at the top right-hand corner on the first page and a 1–inch by 3–inch space at the top right-hand corner on each subsequent page shall be left blank and reserved for use by the clerk of court. c
( e ) Exceptions to Recording Space. Any papers or documents created by persons or entities over which the filing party has no control, including but not limited to wills, codicils, trusts, or other testamentary documents; documents prepared or executed by any public officer; documents prepared, executed, acknowledged, or proved outside of the State of Florida; or documents created by State or Federal government agencies, may be filed without the space required by this rule. d
( f ) Noncompliance. No clerk of court shall refuse for filing any document or paper because of noncompliance with this rule. However, upon request of the clerk of court, noncomplying documents shall be resubmitted in accordance with this rule. e
Court Commentary
[No Change]
RULE 2.525. ELECTRONIC FILING
(a) Definition. “Electronic transmission of documents” means the sending of information by electronic signalstransmission to , by or from a court or clerk , , of the court which when received can be transformed and stored or of information transmitted on paper, microfilm, magnetic storage device, optical imaging system, CD–ROM, flash drive, other electronic data storage system, server, case maintenance system (“CM”), electronic court filing (“ECF”) system, statewide or local electronic portal (“e-portal”), or other electronic record keeping system authorized by the reproduced s upreme S c ourt C in a format sufficient to communicate the information on the original document in a readable format. Electronic transmission of documents includes electronic mail (“e-mail”) and any internet-based transmissionprocedure, and may include procedures allowing for documents to be signed or verified by electronic means. of Florida
(b) Application. Any court or clerk may accept the electronic transmission of documents for filing and may send documents by electronic transmission after the clerk, together with input from the chief judge of the circuit, has obtained approval of of the court procedures , the programs , and standards for electronic filing and from the for doing so s upreme S c ourt C (“ECF Procedures”). All ECF Procedures must comply with the then-current e-filing standards, as promulgated by the supreme court in Administrative Order No. AOSC09–30, or subsequent administrative order. of Florida
(c) Documents Affected.
(1) All documents that are court records, as defined in rule 2.430(a)(1), must be filed by electronic transmission, provided that:may
(A) the clerk has the ability to accept and retain such documents;of court
(B) the clerk or the chief judge of the circuit has requested permission to accept documents filed by electronic transmission; andof court
(C) the s upreme S c ourt of Florida has entered an order granting permission to the clerk C to accept documents filed by electronic transmission.of court
Any attorney, party, or other person who files a document by electronic transmission shall, immediately thereafter, file the identical document, in paper form, with an original signature of the attorney, party, or other person if a signature is otherwise required by these rules (hereinafter called the follow-up filing).
(2) The follow-up filing of any document that has previously been filed by electronic transmission may be discontinued if:
(A) after a 90–day period of accepting electronically filed documents, the clerk of court or the chief judge of the circuit certifies to the Supreme Court of Florida that the electronic filing system is efficient, reliable, and meets the demands of all parties;
(B) the clerk of court or the chief judge of the circuit requests permission to discontinue that portion of the rule requiring a follow-up filing of documents in paper form, except as otherwise required by general law, statute, or court rule; and
(C) the Supreme Court of Florida enters an order directing the clerk of court to discontinue accepting the follow-up filing.
All documents filed by electronic transmission under this rule satisfy any requirement for the filing of an original, except where the court, law, or rule of procedure otherwise provides for the submittal of an original.
The official court file is a set of electronic documents stored in a computer system maintained by the clerk, together with any supplemental non-electronic documents and materials authorized by this rule. It consists of:
(A) documents filed by electronic transmission under this rule;
(B) documents filed in paper form under subdivision (d) that have been converted to electronic form by the clerk;
(C) documents filed in paper form before the effective date of this rule that have been converted to electronic form by the clerk;
(D) documents filed in paper form before the effective date of this rule or under subdivision (d), unless such documentsare converted into electronic form by the clerk;
(E) electronic documents filed pursuant to subdivision (d)(5); and
(F) materials and documents filed pursuant to any rule, statute or court order that either cannot be converted into electronic form or are required to be maintained in paper form.
(3) The documents in the official court file are deemed originals for all purposes except as otherwise provided by statute or rule.
(4) Any document in paper form submitted under subdivision (d) is filed when it is received by the clerk or court and the clerk shall immediately thereafter convert any filed paper document to an electronic document. “Convert to an electronic document” means optically capturing an IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
(b) Exceptions. Any document filed pursuant to any proceeding under Chapter 63, Florida Statutes, which may be relied upon by the court to terminate parental rights, including consent for adoption or affidavit of nonpaternity, shall be exempt from the requirements of Rule of Judicial Administration 2.525(c).
RULE 12.040. ATTORNEYS
(a)–(b) [No Change]
(c) Scope of Representation.
(1) [No Change]
(2) An attorney for the State's Title IV–D child support enforcement agency who appears in a family law matter governed by these rules shall file a notice informing the recipient of Title IV–D services and other parties to the case that the IV–D attorney represents only the Title IV–D agency and not the recipient of IV–D services. The notice must state that the IV–D attorney may only address issues concerning determination of paternity, and establishment, modification, and enforcement of support obligations. The notice may be incorporated into a pleading, motion, or other document filed with the court when the attorney first appears.paper
(d)–(f) [No Change]
Committee Notes
[No Change]
RULE 12.080. SERVICE OF PLEADINGS AND FILING OF PAPERS DOCUMENTS
(a) Service.
(1) Family Law Actions Generally. Service of pleadings and documents after commencement of all family law actions except domestic, repeat, dating, and sexual violence shall be as set forth in Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516, except that rule 2.516 shall also apply to service on the party during the attorney's limited appearance as provided in rule 12.040(f) and be expanded as set forth in subdivisions (b) and (c) to include additional requirements for service of recommended orders and for service on defaulted parties.papers
(2) Domestic, Repeat, Dating, and Sexual Violence Actions. Service of pleadings and documents regarding domestic, repeat, dating, and sexual violence actions shall be governed by Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.610, where it is in conflict with this rule.papers
(b) [No Change]
(c) Defaulted Parties. No service need be made on parties against whom a default has been entered, except that:
(1) [No Change]
(2) Notice of final hearings or trials and court orders shall be served on defaulted parties in the manner provided for service of pleadings and documents contained in Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516.papers
(3) [No Change]
Commentary
[No Change]
Committee Notes
[No Change]
RULE 12.200. CASE MANAGEMENT AND PRETRIAL CONFERENCES
(a) Case Management Conference.
(1) Family Law Proceedings, Generally. A case management conference may be ordered by the court at any time on the court's initiative. A party may request a case management conference 30 days after service of a petition or complaint. At such a conference the court may:
(A) schedule or reschedule the service of motions, pleadings, and other documents ;papers
(B)–(O) [No Change]
(2) [No Change]
(b)–(d) [No Change]