|
|
E-Technology Report Sept-Oct 2007
|
Bob Musser, Committee Chair
I attended the Court Technology Conference put on by the National Center for the State Courts a
few weeks ago, in October. A lot of court clerks
and court software vendors, a lot of education
and opportunity to talk with folks that are often
hard to get to. It’s basically a place for the court
clerks to keep up with what the marketplace has
to offer them, and to exchange ideas among
themselves. I came away with a few
impressions.
Last year when I attended this conference, the
vendors that make court software had no concept
of allowing the process server to act as a party to
the case in any fashion. This year, they
understand the concept, but few have done
anything about it. I guess that is some progress.
I did find one firm that has incorporated the
concept of process server into their case
management application for a new customer, so
we are making headway. I intend to keep on
these vendors, and I’ll keep you up to date.
Even among those of us that have been paying
attention for a few years, the concept of e-service
(as in electronic service of process) still causes
alarm bells. From the Napps Best Practices
publication, "Primary service" of process refers
to the service of initial or other process intended
to acquire jurisdiction over a person or property.
"Secondary service" of process refers to the
service of subsequent papers exchanged between
the parties following service of initial process.
Plain and simple, most process servers don’t do
much in the way of handling secondary service
of any kind, it’s generally handed over directly
between attorneys on a case after getting a
waiver signed. As this type of service goes more
automated and electronic, one can truthfully say
that e-service is happening now and more
frequently. But it’s not taking dollars out of the
average process server’s pocket. Some
technically advanced process servers might even
step in and try to provide a “secondary e-service
tracking” system for want of a better term.
Something to help the attorneys and courts track
this informally exchanged service. Don’t be
alarmed about this. It’s not a fight that we need
to fight. Rest assured, your Board is very
cognizant of the effects that widespread
electronic service of primary process would have
on the profession. We just don’t see much of
that in the immediate future.
The Board has authorized my committee to
investigate email tracking systems such as RPost
to see what they are capable of and what effect
they might have on our profession. Keith
McMaster and I will have a full report at the next
convention.
As always, I welcome your thoughts and feedback.
I can be reached by email at: bobm@dbsinfo.com.
|
|
