Online Availability of Case Information

Print Many courts are working to set up a CM/ECF system.

By Paul M. Bush

May 5, 2003

SPECIAL TO THE NATIONAL LAW JOURNAL

Significant progress has been made on improving the online availability of

litigation and bankruptcy dockets and document images. More and more federal

and state courts are beginning to add or to expand and improve upon their

existing online data capabilities. Almost all federal district, appellate and

bankruptcy courts now offer access to case information online in some form.

This initiative has been officially mandated in §205(a)(5) of the E-Government

Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501 (2002).

State courts have been much slower in their implementation of online case

databases, but certain states are making strides in this area as well.

Although most courts have already implemented online databases, there is still a

small handful of courts that have not. These include the U.S. District Court for the

District of Montana, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York,

the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma and the 2d U.S.

Circuit Court of Appeals. The Southern District of New York Case

Management/Electronic Case Filing System (CM/ECF) release date has been

postponed yet again, to late June of this year, and the 2nd Circuit has

announced its Web Pacer database will go live on Friday, May 9.

Online case information

Direct access in these courts can be obtained only by using the archaic dial-up

method that will soon be extinct. On the opposite end of the spectrum, there are

courts that have implemented Web Pacer, Racer and CM/ECF. These three

online case information systems are very similar, but Racer and CM/ECF offer

real-time access to case information, and only the CM/ECF system has the

ability to process electronic filings. However, now most courts are working to put

into action the CM/ECF system, and discontinue offering all other systems. Two

additional courts using the CM/ECF system worth mentioning are the U.S. Court

of International Trade and U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

There is a clear distinction between the case management and the electronic

case filing systems, two separate but closely related functions. CM is the case

management that allows courts to docket internally and manage cases, and the

public to retrieve dockets and document images. ECF is the electronic case

filing that provides the option for courts to accept electronic filings. So when a

court is actively using CM/ECF, it does not necessarily mean that the court is

accepting electronic filings at the present time.

While bankruptcy courts are leading the way in CM/ECF implementation, district

courts are also gaining speed. A few states have already completely switched

to the CM/ECF system, including Maine, Maryland and Nebraska. New Mexico

has a similar system in place for its district and bankruptcy courts that is not

affiliated with the CM/ECF system.

Free access

Accessing the CM/ECF, Racer and Web Pacer systems costs 7 cents per page

with a 30-page price cap for document images; however, there are still some

courts that can be accessed for free. These courts utilize Racer or their own

independently built database systems. These include the U.S. Bankruptcy Court

for the District of Delaware for documents filed before July 28, 2001; the U.S.

District and Bankruptcy courts for the District of Idaho; the U.S. District Court for

the Southern District of Indiana for civil cases filed before June 1, 2002, and all

criminal cases; the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Minnesota; the U.S.

Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina; the U.S. Bankruptcy

Court for the Western District of Oklahoma; the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the

Eastern District of Washington; the 7th Circuit; the U.S. Supreme Court; the

Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; and the U.S. Tax Court.

Litigators who need to monitor closely a case's docket and who require

immediate updates should note that docket-monitoring services such as

CourtLink and CourtExpress have quickly begun to lose their usefulness for this

purpose. As more courts offer electronic filing with real-time access using

CM/ECF and Racer, these vendors simply cannot monitor dockets effectively

since they can only access the docket on a daily basis. It's safe to assume that

these vendors will eventually offer docket monitoring more than once a day, but

right now it's important to be aware of this delay.

For example, in bankruptcy cases there can be dozens of new docket entries

made on any given day. Attorneys will not learn of these new filings promptly

unless they access the court's database manually.

Additionally, when a case is electronically filed, attorneys with an ECF account

(as opposed to a public access CM/ECF account) have the ability to receive e-

mail notifications immediately after a document is filed. This will continue to be

the fastest notification method available.

State Courts

Many states are just beginning to add databases online to access case

information. Since there are significantly more cases in state courts than in

federal courts, the task is much larger and complex. Some states offer separate

databases for individual courts, while others have a centralized method of broad

court access. States with broader access include Alabama, Arizona, Colorado,

Connecticut, Iowa, Missouri, New York, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Utah, Virginia,

Washington and Wisconsin. States with many individual court databases worth

mentioning include California, Florida and Ohio.

State court case databases and electronic-filing programs are more heavily

influenced and designed by commercial vendors, as compared to federal courts.

Some of the many vendors include CCI-Maximus, Henschen & Associates Inc.,

LexisNexis, Manatron Inc., The Sanderson Group, The Software Group and

Verilaw Technologies Inc.

Other Sources

If attorneys can't download a document they need from a court database, the

following are a few commercial vendors that offer images for downloading:

* Courthouse News Service - offering recent complaints from various federal and state courts in

Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, North Carolina, New

Jersey, New York, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Texas and Washington.

* Virtual Docket - offering various case documents from the Delaware District, Bankruptcy, Supreme

and Chancery courts.

* LegalCaseDocs - offering briefs, complaints, motions and other related documents in many

jurisdictions.

* LitWatch - offering complaints, opinions and other documents in various jurisdictions.

While these companies continue to offer many documents for downloading, others have discontinued their online offerings. WDS (formerly Washington Document Service) has discontinued "Hot Docs," Juritas.com appears no longer to be in business, and Courthouse News no longer offers complaints from New York Supreme courts online.

The speed and legislation for implementing online case retrieval has greatly improved, which is reflected in what's available online. A law firm will be at a great disadvantage if it is not aware of the current court case database technology and availability. As practical obscurity is reduced, the value and importance of electronic researchers, filers and law librarians will rival and

possibly exceed that of traditional court clerks.

The different courts' integration of technology as it affects litigation and bankruptcy practice is significant and positive. During the next few years, continued growth and improvement will further enable faster, more efficient case-information management, retrieval and filing for law firms, court employees and the general public.

Disclaimers, Copyright Notice, Privacy Policy, Terms and Conditions