A meeting was held on July 10, 2019 at the Stanley Mosk Courthouse in Los Angeles attended by representatives of the Los Angeles Superior Court (“LASC”), Journal Technologies, Inc. (“JTI”), which is the Courts Electronic Filing Manager (“EFM”), and Electronic Filing Service Providers (“EFSP”).

After the meeting, LASC published this FAQ (Revised 7/18/2019) on the Courts website, along with a helpful Tips for an Effective Electronic Filing handout. The purpose of this recap is to inform our clients of additional topics that were discussed in the July 10 meeting that were not addressed in the FAQ published by LASC, which include:

Return of Signed Proposed Orders

In the FAQ published by LASC under #49 and #50, the Court states that signed copies of proposed orders will be electronically transmitted back to the submitting party by the EFSP. However, the issue discussed at the meeting was that signed copies of proposed orders were not being transmitted to the EFSPs. The reason was that clerks were uploading the signed proposed orders to the Courts Case Management System (“CMS”) but not into the EFM. Therefore, JTI did not receive the upload and was unable to send back the signed orders to the EFSPs.

The resolution was that Court Operations would be working with JTI to build an automated process to upload signed orders from the CMS to the EFM so that JTI can send the files back to the EFSPs, who can then make the signed orders electronically available to submitting parties.

Until the resolution is implemented, the current process is for the Court to continue mailing copies of the signed orders to the submitting parties. When accepted, the signed order will also be uploaded to the CMS and made available on the Courts Register of Action (“ROA”). Moreover, if the filing of the proposed order is rejected, the reasoning will be sent to the EFSP.

Although the Courts FAQ says otherwise, this information will be helpful to communicate with your concerned customers so that they understand this is a feature the Court is currently working on and that they will still receive their signed orders.

Refund Process for Fees

In the FAQ under #38, the Court advises parties to request refunds using Form LACIV-150, which can be mailed, delivered in-person, or electronically filed. However, in order to electronically file the form, the filer must pay a fee.

The Courts finance team will be working with JTI to build a new process for EFSPs to submit refund requests without additional fees being charged. This will include a new form.

Fee Waivers

We were informed that Court clerks have been trained to check for fee waivers, however, it is ultimately the responsibility of the filer to self-certify that they qualify for a fee waiver by checking a box and filing FW-001 Request to Waive Court Fees with the appropriate documentation. Otherwise, the clerk will process the filing while charging the fee.

In addition, the EFSPs in attendance at the meeting requested that the Notice Filing Review Complete (“NFRC”) file sent by JTI specify when transactions contain fee waivers instead of populating the fee with a $0 value. JTI created a ticket so that they can work on adding this information in the future.

Backlog

The EFSPs inquired into the backlog of pending orders that appear stuck in the Courts queue. The Court advised us they were unaware of this backlog and JTI advised that they are working on the transactions that were stuck with this status. They are currently working on a fix.

Outages & Workaround to eFiling

The Court also informed the EFSPs that clerks are not always aware when there is an outage preventing parties from eFiling. JTI advised that they do send emails to clerks from their help desk. The EFSPs suggested that JTI also include a banner on their portal when outages occur so filers are also made aware of the outages.

The Court also provided a workaround for customers when an outage prevents new orders from being submitted timely. The Court stated that physical documents be submitted to Department 1 for Ex Parte motions for the Court to decide to set a different filing date. The EFSPs in attendance advised the Court that currently there is only a form titled “Exemption from eFiling” which is insufficient and requested that another form be made available for when outages occur. The Court accepted this request and stated it will provide an update at a later time, along with a new process and form. In the interim, the Court asked that paper submissions be made to Department 1.

We are providing you this notice so that you are aware of upcoming resolutions that will address some of your concerns. We will notify you of any new updates from the Court.  

As always, if you have any questions or concerns, please contact a member of our Direct Legal Support team.

Direct Legal Support, Inc.
Call: (800) 675-5376
Email: support@directlegal.com
Visit: www.directlegal.com