The following slide show is from a 2004 presentation I gave at a NAPPS Conference. Almost all of it is as relevant today as it was five years ago.
The diagrams that predicted where things were headed have come to pass and are having a negative impact on court filing and process serving businesses from coast to coast.
eFiling and eService Presentation 2004 -
eFiling and eService Presentation 2004 -
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Saturday, October 17, 2009
SHERIFF TO ACCEPT SERVICE OF SUBPOENAS ELECTRONICALLY
In Collier County Florida, the public defenders office is slated, by years end, to begin serving subpoenas on law enforcement officials (sheriffs) electronically. This appears to be a collaborate effort and exact details of the system are unknown. While perhaps inevitable, it’s a sad day indeed when you see folks involved in this project saying things like:
“It’s a great thing. It’s a sign of the times…It’s where we’re all headed.” - Charlie Green, Clerk of the Court
“It lets us be sure the people we are serving have actually been served.” - Elizabeth Snow, IT Director, Public Defender
It should be our profession saying these things but it’s not. We should not be surprised if we see more of this given the lack of strategy, leadership and vision in our profession specific to electronic service.
The full story can be found here.
“It’s a great thing. It’s a sign of the times…It’s where we’re all headed.” - Charlie Green, Clerk of the Court
“It lets us be sure the people we are serving have actually been served.” - Elizabeth Snow, IT Director, Public Defender
It should be our profession saying these things but it’s not. We should not be surprised if we see more of this given the lack of strategy, leadership and vision in our profession specific to electronic service.
The full story can be found here.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Fraudulent Service of Process being addressed in New York City
New York City Councilman Garodnick Announces Reform
of Fraudulent Process Service.
Garodnick Announces Reform of Fraudulent Process Service
In the aftermath of Attorney General Andrew Cuomo suing 35 law firms for illegally failing to notify New Yorkers that they were being sued over old debts, Council Member Garodnick announced legislation to protect consumers from fraudulent process service.
Each year, debt collectors suing in New York City Civil Court collect $800 million in judgments. In 80 to 90 percent of those cases, New Yorkers never realize that they have been sued — frequently because the process servers hired by the debt collection law firm never deliver their court papers. The result is a default judgment, which can be used to freeze a bank account and garnish wages, and which ruins a person’s credit.
Council Member Garodnick’s bill would rein in process servers by requiring that they, and the agencies they work for, provide the City a surety bond, or insurance, in order to be licensed to do business in New York City.
“Everyone is responsible for repaying their debts—nothing here changes that,” Council Member Garodnick said. “But our neighbors deserve a chance to defend themselves in court from debt claims, which are often frivolous. It doesn’t help anyone for our neighbors to be put into financial purgatory over debts they never actually incurred.”
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Service of Process Via Facebook
Earlier this year a judge in Alberta, Canada signed an order allowing a defendant to be served by posting the Notice of the Action to the defendants Facebook account.
![]()
This is the third instance of Facebook being allowed/ordered for the Service of Process that I am aware of. First in Australia and the second in New Zealand, both occurred in the last 12 months.
This post comes on the heals of a posting regarding Service of Process via Twitter earlier this week. Clearly judges around the world see social networks as being at least as reliable a means for giving notice if not more so than publication when all other methods have failed. I have to admit that I would agree that in certain circumstances service of process via social-networks or by other electronic means makes more sense than service by publication.
I would not dismiss these recent developments as being a fad or a trend. They are important and I believe they demonstrate that the courts and our customers are more and more willing to consider alternate manners of service that only a few short years ago where unthinkable.
Just this evening I received an email from a fellow process server in Nevada. He wrote that he has realized that his court filing business is all but gone come February of next year because the courts in the 8th Judicial District of Nevada has mandated electronic filing.
He admits knew this day was coming. He also admits that he was not prepared for the reality of it hitting him so soon and so hard. He now finds himself wondering how to adjust his business model in order to survive the changes that are happening around him. He is not alone; process serving companies from Seattle to Philadelphia in the last year have found themselves facing the same dilemma.
The Service of Process has remained largely unchanged for more than 100 years. I believe we are fooling ourselves if we think the act of serving process will not see a dramatic change in the years to come.
My point is we have been talking about eFiling and eService at a national level for more than 10 years. We need start preparing ourselves and our business for these and other challenges if we hope to remain relevant in the digital age.
Are we on our own as we face these challenges or will the state and/or national process server associations lead the way? Do those associations even have a role in addressing these challenges? If so, do they have the talent and where-with-all to help insure the profession remains viable for many years to come?
What do you think?
This is the third instance of Facebook being allowed/ordered for the Service of Process that I am aware of. First in Australia and the second in New Zealand, both occurred in the last 12 months.
This post comes on the heals of a posting regarding Service of Process via Twitter earlier this week. Clearly judges around the world see social networks as being at least as reliable a means for giving notice if not more so than publication when all other methods have failed. I have to admit that I would agree that in certain circumstances service of process via social-networks or by other electronic means makes more sense than service by publication.
I would not dismiss these recent developments as being a fad or a trend. They are important and I believe they demonstrate that the courts and our customers are more and more willing to consider alternate manners of service that only a few short years ago where unthinkable.
Just this evening I received an email from a fellow process server in Nevada. He wrote that he has realized that his court filing business is all but gone come February of next year because the courts in the 8th Judicial District of Nevada has mandated electronic filing.
He admits knew this day was coming. He also admits that he was not prepared for the reality of it hitting him so soon and so hard. He now finds himself wondering how to adjust his business model in order to survive the changes that are happening around him. He is not alone; process serving companies from Seattle to Philadelphia in the last year have found themselves facing the same dilemma.
The Service of Process has remained largely unchanged for more than 100 years. I believe we are fooling ourselves if we think the act of serving process will not see a dramatic change in the years to come.
My point is we have been talking about eFiling and eService at a national level for more than 10 years. We need start preparing ourselves and our business for these and other challenges if we hope to remain relevant in the digital age.
Are we on our own as we face these challenges or will the state and/or national process server associations lead the way? Do those associations even have a role in addressing these challenges? If so, do they have the talent and where-with-all to help insure the profession remains viable for many years to come?
What do you think?
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
FTC Debt Collection Roundtable Video and Transcripts Now Available
he Federal Trade Commission held the second of three roundtable sessions around the country last week in San Francisco. The Service of Process has been a topic of discussion in the first two sessions. As you may know, the profession took a few kicks in the gut during the first roundtable in Chicago.
The San Francisco session also had the Service of Process on the agenda. This time around process servers were given an opportunity to participate as part of the panel of speakers. Paul Tamaroff and Andy Estin were on the panel and represented the interests of the private process serving profession. The San Francisco session was less painful to witness but it was not without its moments where the professionalism of the industry was called into question. Both Andy and Paul offered suggestions on how to address the problems.
If you are interested in viewing the video webcast or reading the transcripts of either the Chicago or San Francisco sessions that were dedicated to the Service of Process and Default Judgments. I have provided the following links:
Chicago Webcast: http://www.mobilevideo.net/ftc/080509_ftc_sess1/softv.index.htm
Chicago Transcripts: http://htc-01.media.globix.net/COMP008760MOD1/ftc_web/transcripts/080509_sess1.pdf
San Francisco Webcast: http://www.mobilevideo.net/ftc/093009_ftc_sess1/softv.index.htm
San Francisco Transcripts: http://htc-01.media.globix.net/COMP008760MOD1/ftc_web/transcripts/093009_sess1.pdf
You might want to take an Advil or two first.
The San Francisco session also had the Service of Process on the agenda. This time around process servers were given an opportunity to participate as part of the panel of speakers. Paul Tamaroff and Andy Estin were on the panel and represented the interests of the private process serving profession. The San Francisco session was less painful to witness but it was not without its moments where the professionalism of the industry was called into question. Both Andy and Paul offered suggestions on how to address the problems.
If you are interested in viewing the video webcast or reading the transcripts of either the Chicago or San Francisco sessions that were dedicated to the Service of Process and Default Judgments. I have provided the following links:
Chicago Webcast: http://www.mobilevideo.net/ftc/080509_ftc_sess1/softv.index.htm
Chicago Transcripts: http://htc-01.media.globix.net/COMP008760MOD1/ftc_web/transcripts/080509_sess1.pdf
San Francisco Webcast: http://www.mobilevideo.net/ftc/093009_ftc_sess1/softv.index.htm
San Francisco Transcripts: http://htc-01.media.globix.net/COMP008760MOD1/ftc_web/transcripts/093009_sess1.pdf
You might want to take an Advil or two first.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Service of Process Via Twitter
In an ever increasing and troubling trend, yet another court has allowed Service of Process using a social networking site.
Yesterday an English High Court ruled that a court injunction (order) could be served via Twitter. The Order approving this service method is being called the Blaney’s Blarney Order after the subject matter of the litigation. The law firm representing the plaintiff in this case claims this is the first time an order has ever been served via Twitter.
Not so fast... It may not be the first time Twitter was used to provide notice to a party to a lawsuit. Earlier this year a Dutch antipiracy group brought suit against Pirate Bay (a Swedish company accused of hosting illegal downloads) and provided notice via Facebook and a Twitter account claiming they weren't able to locate the company founders. See tweet below.
- Can't locate the person to serve
- Get creative in serving the documents
- Claim you weren't served
- Serving the wrong person
In a previous post on this blog dated 9/11/09, I asked the question "Is this the future of Service of Process? If you have not already read that post I encourage you to do so, I cited a few other instances of social networks being used to effect service of process.
What do you think?
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)