News and Insights

Effective immediately, the Santa Clara Family Clerk’s Office accepts the following domestic violence (DV) orders after hearing via eFile. The Court directs filers to use the filing codes specified below to ensure an envelope is directed to the proper queue.

• Use filing code DV Continuance After Hearing to submit the Order on Request to Continue Hearing (form DV-116).
• Use filing code Order: Restraining Order After Hearing to submit the Restraining Order After Hearing (form DV-130).
• Use filing code Request: Renew Restraining Order: Amended to submit the amended Notice of Hearing to Renew Restraining Order (form DV-710).
• Use filing code Order: Renew Restraining Order to submit the Order to Renew Domestic Violence Restraining Order (form DV-730).

The Court reports that the above-listed DV orders after hearing will be accepted unfiled, forwarded to the Judicial Officer for signature and E-served back to the email address listed on the document. The Court further notes that this final copy will contain the Judicial Officer’s signature and electronic filing stamp.

For further information about eFiling in Santa Clara Court an Electronic Filing page and a Forms and Filing FAQ page are available on the Court’s website.

Need to eFile Now?

Rapid Legal provides eFiling into Santa Clara Superior Court
and every California Court that accepts eFiling.

Is your firm new to Santa Clara Superior Court or new to eFiling? Contact Rapid Legal and partner with an eFiling provider that has experience with this Court and can help make your eFilings successful.

Book a demo or create an account today.

Alameda County – JCCP cases continue to be drop box only. For faster filing and return the court clerks request that the Alameda case number and JCCP case number appear on the caption page.

Contra Costa County Superior Court – A filing window specifically for runners close at 12 noon.

Kern County Superior Court – The court will receive documents in proposed orders. Once signed, the court will return the documents directly via email.

Placer County Superior Court – For case initiation: If uploading documents in addition to the complaint, upload the complaint first. By doing this, the options for summons and civil case cover sheet will populate. If the complaint is not uploaded first users will not be able to find selections for other documents, such as a summons.

San Diego County Superior Court – A known bug in the SDSC system pulls up first appearance fees on subsequent filings. To avoid unnecessary charges, users may add notes in the order details tab to state that first appearance fees have already been paid.

Sacramento Superior Court – Filings are received in only and conformed copies are returned to the runner once processed. The court is running 8 weeks behind.

Helpful Reminders

• The deadline for court documents that exceed 100 pages is 1 hour earlier than normal deadline.
• Efile orders cannot be cancelled or edited.
• Fees Tab – You must enter the correct fee amount in this tab or your order will be rejected. Fees are not automatically paid to the court by selecting the option to authorize Rapid Legal to advance fees.
• Subpoena Witness Fee – Be sure you know when The Code of Civil Procedure of California requires a witness fee for a subpoena.
• Family Law FAQ – Filing in Los Angeles Superior Court Family Law? This is everything you need to know.
• Service of Process Bad Address – Service of Process orders sent to a bad address will be held for 3 days. Rapid Legal customers may provide a new address during this 3-day period before the order is closed.
• Conformed Documents – Can’t find your conformed documents in the Rapid Legal user portal? Before you give up look at your closed tab or try adjusting the date filter.
• Know the Differences Between an LLC and a Corporation – LLC stands for Limited Liability Company and is an association of members specified by the corporation code. Service is completed under CCP 416.40 association or partnership.A Corporation is a legal entity that is separate and distinct from its owners. Service is completed under CCP 416.10 corporation.Companies that are set up as LLCs or corporations are registered with the California Secretary of State and are served under the California Code of Civil Procedure.

Process servers are the hands and legs of civil litigation. Millions of dollars in fees and settlements hinge on good process serving, so it is critical to have a reliable process service provider who can serve documents promptly and keep cases from becoming problematic as they move upstream. This article helps law firms recognize the traits of a process server that is reliable, effective, and can serve as a strategic partner to the firm.

Where do good process servers come from?

Since most states require no special licensing or education for process serving, it is not uncommon to hear the refrain, “Almost anyone can be a process server.” Nothing could be further from the truth.

Good process servers are prized for their efficiency, efficacy, and reliability. But there is a more specific set of qualities that separate excellent process servers from the merely adequate. They include:

• Resourcefulness
• Patience
• Industriousness
• Craftiness

These four qualities are especially important when a process server is attempting to serve parties likely to evade service. Defendants may attempt to dodge service through behaviors that range from not answering a door knock to moving out of state. A professional process server knows how to deal with these behaviors, overcome them, and successfully serve legal papers.

Qualities to focus on when evaluating a potential process server:

Resourcefulness

A process server who is resourceful can adjust to variables such as location, presentation, and identity, to get documents served. Here is an example of how a resourceful process server might make those adjustments to serve an evasive party:

Floral delivery: In this scenario, the process server assumes the role of delivery person and stages a delivery to the defendant at a bona fide event such as a defendant’s birthday, anniversary, or holiday observation.

If the person who answers the door hesitates to allow the process server inside the home, the process server overcomes those objections by stating that the floral arrangement must be handed over personally to the party being served.

Upon encountering the party face-to-face, the server asks, “Are you Jane Doe?” The party responds in the affirmative and the process server hands over the documents to the defendant, along with the flowers.

Other approaches some resourceful process servers have used include dressing as a pizza delivery person and attaching a subpoena to the inside of a pizza box, or to wearing clothing like a commercial parcel delivery service and either handing over documents or attaching them to a box.

Patience

It is sometimes more cost-effective to wait out a party rather than return multiple times to a bad address. A good process server knows that in some cases the most efficient solution is to wait for a party to appear at a location where the individual is known to frequent. This requires only that the server exercise patience and make the serve lawfully. (They may even offer a stakeout, which is typically an additional fee.)

Some process servers may be tempted to bend the rules and leave documents at a location even when the party to be served is nowhere in sight. To avoid this type of service, which will jeopardize a lawsuit, law firms should research the provider’s reputation to assure their serves are ethical and stand up to scrutiny.

Industriousness

Process serving is not a 9 to 5 occupation. A high-performing process server will be diligent and willing to put in long hours or work odd schedules as a matter of course. This is especially helpful when defendants are unlikely to be at a particular location at a specific time.

In this case, the process server overcomes an evasive defendant simply by putting in the time, travel, and effort to meet the party when and where that person becomes available.

Craftiness

A process server who is crafty may combine resourcefulness, industriousness, and patience to successfully serve court documents. Leveraging these qualities to identify a good address for service is one of the most productive things a process server can do.

To establish a good address the process server may ask neighbors or other locals about information that can help determine where a party lives, when the party may be at a residence, and where the party may go when he or she leaves the residence. Following is an example of how a crafty process server may execute this:

Package delivery: In this scenario, the process server carries a package marked for delivery to the defendant. Instead of going to the defendant’s address the process server approaches a neighbor’s door and says, “Hello, I have a delivery for John Doe.”

The neighbor may respond with, “John Doe doesn’t live here, he lives in the house across the street. You have the wrong address.”

Another response may be, “John Doe used to live here but he moved across the street 5 years ago.”

As the process server leaves, he may ask, “Do you know whether John Doe is home right now so I can deliver this?” The neighbor may respond: “Yes, he is,” or, “No, John usually doesn’t arrive home until about 7 p.m.”

Now the process server has actionable information that can be used to pinpoint a good address or guide further investigation to ascertain the correct address.

The time and effort spent validating that address oftentimes will be less costly than making multiple attempts at a bad address. That is important because it typically costs money each time service is attempted.

Research and technology

A crafty process server will also be a skilled researcher and an expert in making serves as efficient as possible. Again, this is vital for dealing with hard-to-serve parties, and one way a crafty server will tackle such assignments is to use technology that performs skip tracing. Parties associated with debt-collection cases oftentimes may avoid service by moving out of town or out of state. Skip tracing can help locate these individuals so that papers can be served.

Another tactic a good process server may use is to simply leave papers with a party being served. This can be an effective tactic should the party refuse to take the documents in hand.

Success indicators

A process server worth having is one that is experienced and has statistics to back up any claims about performance. One good way to judge a service of process provider is to ask about that provider’s serve success rate.

A high serve success rate indicates that a process server is consistently successful in serving case participants. Anything above 90% is good.

Additionally, a good process server will have a reputation for serving parties quickly and promptly delivering proof of service. A desirable process server will also be a capable researcher who uses online resources to maximize the effectiveness of in-person work.

Speed of Service

Gaging a process server’s speed of service means looking at how quickly the provider can successfully complete a serve as well as how quickly the Proof of Service is delivered back to the law firm. For example, a process server may require 10 days to get someone served, and an additional 3 days to complete and provide the Proof of Service to the firm. It is important to understand the average amount of time required for both of those processes in order to accurately estimate speed of service.

Customer Service

Law firms should also be sure to ask a process serving company how serious it is about customer satisfaction. It’s important to ask the provider how it tracks customer satisfaction and whether it can show proof of satisfaction scores or reports. And it is vitally important to ask what the provider does when customers are not satisfied.

Do you think you know a good service of process provider when you see one? Test your knowledge here:

What to Look for When Hiring a Process Serving Company.

The Process Server’s Bread and Butter:

Service of Process

Process servers handle a variety of court documents ranging from subpoenas and complaints to eviction notices and summonses. Those documents all have important functions that operationalize once handed over by a process server, but the one document a process server carries that confers possibly the most gravitas of all is service of process.

Following is a brief examination of what service of process is, how it is carried out, and what distinguishes it from other terms that sound similar but are quite different.

Service of process methods

For the most part, service of process must be done in person. But is that the only way?

Not always.

Personal service and substituted service are two common types of service of process used in the United States, with personal service being the one most difficult for a defendant to attack for its legality.

Another method used to perform service of process is publication. For example, publication in a newspaper.

Publication as a process serving method may be useful if a defendant cannot be located. This method provides constructive notice as opposed to actual notice. It is also considered the lowest constitutionally acceptable form of service. In the state of California service via publication is authorized by Code of Civil Procedure 415.50.

Service of process may also be conducted via public posting. This method is sometimes used when a defendant cannot be located. As the name suggests, public posting is performed by posting a notice in a place the defendant is known to frequent.

While Public posting is used to perform service of process it sometimes may be problematic. For example, using the public posting method may imply that the plaintiff knows where the defendant frequents but was possibly lax in efforts to find the defendant. Public posting may also suggest the plaintiff only guessed at places the defendant may frequent.

Details governing the use of public posting in California

appear in Code of Civil Procedure 415.45.

In some cases, service of process may even be performed using social media such as Facebook. This service of process method is rare, however, and still in its infancy.

Service of Process vs. Giving Notice

There is a difference between documents that can—or must—be served personally (service of process) and documents that can be eServed, mailed, or handled by other means (eService). The difference between these two types of documents lies in the results they create, and here are the critical distinctions you should know.

eService: Giving notice

The role of eService in civil litigation is straightforward: eService is an electronic substitute for service on opposing counsel. This aspect of civil litigation traditionally has been executed with paper documents such as printed facsimiles or the U.S. Mail.

In the 21^st century, however, things are different. Now, online technology and email make it possible for document exchange to occur electronically. But not without a catch.

For example, in the state of California, papers can be served electronically only if a party or other person has expressly consented to receive electronic service in that specific action.

Another notable restriction on eService in California is that some documents simply are not allowed to be exchanged electronically. For example, a document required to be served by certified or registered mail is not authorized for electronic service.

Service of process: Getting jurisdiction

Service of process is performed when a party other than the plaintiff gives a copy of the court papers to the party the plaintiff is suing. Service advises the other party of three critical things:

• • What the plaintiff is asking for
  • Date and place of the trial
  • What the party can choose to do

Looking deeper at service of process we see that it gives the court the power to adjudicate a case or issue. We also see that it gives the court the “power” to command witnesses to appear: it confers jurisdiction.

Proof of service procedures

Personal service vs. substituted service

Once you’ve decided on a provider for you service of process, you’ll need to determine which method of service will be used.

There are three primary methods for service of process: 1.) actual or personal service; 2.) substituted service, 3.) service by publication. The two methods that are most common are personal service and substituted service.

Personal service may be as simple as approaching the person to be served and saying, “These are court papers.” Then, present the person copies of all papers checked on the form, or leave the documents within close proximity. An easy speaking distance is a good rule of thumb for judging this distance. It isn’t always that simple, but rarely is it a dangerous game of cat-and-mouse carried out in dark alleys.

Substituted service is a method that can be used when the plaintiff doesn’t want to use personal service or may not be able to locate the party to be served. To perform substituted service the person performing service must be at least 18 years of age and not listed in the case. Substituted service also requires the additional step of mailing another copy of the papers by first class mail to the party being sued at the same address where the papers were left.

For substituted service, state law may require that documents be mailed to the party being served in addition to standard substituted service requirements. This is currently the case in California, New York, and Illinois, so it is important to find out whether your state requires this additional task.

Process server: a law firm’s strategic partner

At the highest level of process servers are those who have the right stuff to become a strategic partner. A vendor that is qualified to fill this role may be affiliated with a larger litigation support service provider and, thus, invisible to the law firm itself. The litigation support service provider brings value to the law firm, however, with deep industry experience, a technology platform that delivers efficiency, and a provable history of high performance.

Technology for process serving

As a strategic partner, the litigation support service provider uses its technology platform to innovate a better way for the law firm to operate. One way it can do that is to make data about process service orders in the provider’s own system shareable with the law firm’s systems. This can be especially useful by making data instantly available about billing, court fees, vendor fees, and payments for process serving orders.

Interested in Learning Other Process Serving Technology Use Cases?

Read: Technology Your Process Server Should Be Using

Data is better than a crystal ball

If you’re unclear about how sharing this data positively impacts the bottom line, think of it this way: For each case, every transaction receipt and every document can be stored in a law firm’s own system. This means fees and payments can be easily accounted for and reimbursed when the case ends, dramatically collapsing the time needed to reconcile expenses.

A portal also allows the vendor to manage and efficiently track the performance of its affiliate network in executing the serve. This, in turn, builds an extremely high level of accountability felt all along the service of process supply chain.

The portal also creates two other important advantages to improve service of process efficiency: it eliminates paper controls and allows the server to eSign the proof of service.

Measure the results

Sharable data can also be used to create strategic reports. These reports provide detailed views of service of process orders and the vendor’s execution thereof, as well as other order types placed through the portal. At a glance, users can see which types of orders contribute positively to the firm’s bottom line and which types compromise it.

Most law firms lack the infrastructure and staff to collect business intelligence at this level easily. That’s why it’s important to have a vendor whose technology makes it simple to gather and share it. If your litigation support service provider isn’t able or willing to deliver this sort of value to help you grow, it’s probably time to find one that will.

4 ways you should be using sharable data in your firm’s business strategy:

• Service level distribution
• Orders by type
• Service of process orders by pricing zone
• Service of process performance

Read Technology Your Process Server Should Be Using and learn how these reports can save money for your law firm!

Expert advice is a click away

By reading this article, you’ve taken an important first step toward building your process serving expertise. The thing to remember about process serving—as the term implies—is that it is a process. It is a task filled with nuance that won’t be mastered overnight. So don’t be afraid to seek advice and expertise.

Rapid Legal possesses some of the industry’s deepest process serving expertise, thanks to staff members who have decades of hands-on, practical experience as professional process servers. That expertise is built into our technology platform to make it easy for you to fulfill your process serving needs from a single, simple-to-use source.

If you’d like to see for yourself how process serving can be done conveniently from our online portal, contact one of our account executives for a no-obligation demonstration.

Book a demo or schedule a call

with a Rapid Legal team member now.

Be part of your firm’s success story by choosing a litigation support service partner who has your back when it’s time to make critical decisions about this function. Ask us anything and don’t worry about being judged.

There is no judgement. At least not until the court papers are served.

Addendum:

Most commonly served documents

A process server’s toolkit primarily consists of documents: paper or electronic. Each document performs a distinct function and some will significantly alter the course of business or relationships.

It’s critical to understand the legal action each document triggers, so we’ve defined them here in alphabetical order:

Complaint: The initial pleading in which an action is commenced and sets forth a claim for relief. The filing of the complaint is a charge against a defendant or several defendants and sets forth a cause or causes of actions against them.

Notice of Motion: A notice in writing stating that a certain day designated a motion will be made to the court for the purpose or object stated. The notice is served on opposing counsel and all parties and gives all parties a time and date for the court hearing.

Notice to Quit: This notice is given to tenants to terminate the tenancy of the premises. The notice states that at the end of the specified date, the tenancy is terminated and directs that the tenant must move out.

Notice to Pay Rent or Quit: A notice to a tenant of a rental property, informing him or her that the rent or a portion of the rent is due. Service on the tenant in writing that the rent is due usually in three days after the date of service, and if the rent is not paid, the tenant is requested to “quit” (leave) the premises.

Opposition: A pleading filed to oppose or state a reason a Motion should not be granted, otherwise known as a 1011.

Order for Appearance (ORAP): This is a court order that compels a personal appearance of the judgment debtor. Disobedience of this order by not appearing could subject the judgment debtor to a citation of contempt and ultimately lead to an arrest.

Order to Show Cause: An order to appear as directed, and presents to the court such reasons or considerations as one has to offer why a particular order should not be confirmed, take effect or to be executed.

Plaintiff’s Claim and Order to go to Small Claims Court: A claim of plaintiff is a small claims document filed by the plaintiff against the defendant of defendants. The claim must be for a monetary amount only. The claim is a 5 page document stating how the defendant or defendants damaged the plaintiff and in what amount.

Temporary Restraining Order: This is an order compelling compliance and failure to obey it could result in bringing the person restrained into contempt of court and possible arrest. A TRO is a case matter that might restrain the respondent from calling, harassing or bothering the petitioner. The order is to restrain the person served from doing any act specified in the order until the hearing takes place.

Summons: A writ of process [issued by the clerk of the court] the person named that an action has been commenced against him in the court from where the process issues and that he/she is required to appear.

Subpoena: A command to appear at a certain time and place to give testimony as a witness.

Technology changes the strategic advantages litigation support service providers can offer. It’s time for law firms to think differently about how that relationship can elevate their position and stature with customers and peers. A key consideration is to select a strategic partner over a transactional vendor.

Don’t be Kodak. In 1990 the company was valued at approximately $30 billion and it was bankrupt by 2012. Why? Because the Kodak brain trust never thought differently about itself, its partners, or its customers. The company never considered digital photography a serious threat and continued to bet the farm on the status quo.

The decision to bet the farm led Kodak to buy the farm.

Think your way to success

Law firms can learn an important lesson from the Kodak story: Look closely at the technology and expertise your litigation support services provider brings to the table and think about how you can use those assets to achieve your business goals.

The first step is to stop thinking about litigation support services providers as vendors and begin thinking about them as strategic partners. It’s a big, competitive world out there, and you need expert partners you can count on to work in your corner.

What does “strategic” look like?

It can be confusing to understand what defines a strategic partner. Words like “strategy” and “strategic” get lost easily in buzzword bingo, and for this discussion, we need to clearly distinguish strategic partner thinking from transactional vendor thinking. So, here is a simple way we define each for litigation support service providers:

• A strategic litigation support service partner does more for your business than just supply a service. A strategic partner focuses on providing you a complete solution by leveraging their expertise, experience, technology, and customer support resources to meet your needs. They are proactive with you and seek to add value to your firm. They inquire about your firm’s goals and objectives to understand their role and fit in helping you achieve them. They focus on strategic business outcomes like cost and process efficiencies as well as risk management. They are always thinking of new and different ways to do things. They care about each interaction with you because their focus is a long-term relationship and partnership with your firm. They provide you data and reports for transparency and accountability, plus much more.
• A transactional litigation support service vendor, on the other hand, simply sells you a service. They tend to be reactive to your needs. They tend to think and act tactically by focusing on the what, not the why, focusing on the now, not the future, focusing on the status quo, not innovation. They will typically take care of your firm’s basic needs, but they will not have the capability nor mindset to solve new problems or seize new opportunities for your firm.

The differences that legitimately separate strategic partners from the sprawling field of transactional vendors may not be readily apparent on the surface. To further illustrate, Table 1 notes key characteristics of a company that has strategy markers in its DNA versus one that does not.

Table 1.

Now that you see some of the tell-tale differences between strategic vendors and transactional vendors, it’s time for a look closer at how these differences affect a law firm’s business strategy. Let’s examine each dimension in a little more detail.

Relationship (long-term vs. short term)

This is the easiest of the strategic characteristics to understand. A long-term strategic partner will want to provide turnkey solutions that improve efficiencies and reduce costs. As one example, a strategic vendor can add value beyond everyday litigation support service delivery by integrating its portal with the law firm’s system to push service expense data that makes client/expense reconciliation far easier and more accurate.

If you can’t imagine the litigation support services provider you currently have bringing this kind of value to the table, be sure to read about how Rapid Legal worked with a large lemon law firm to make this type of synergy a reality in the case study near the end of this article.

Not every potential strategic partner may be able to orchestrate a system-to-system integration; and that scale of operation may not make sense for every strategic business relationship. But that should not keep you from thinking of your litigation support services provider as a partner who can offer strategic solutions like automated workflows or pulling/pushing data for report generation or expense reconciliation. In some cases, their strategic support may be as simple as providing an expert review service for your court filing to maximize court acceptance of your documents or helping you with an additional court service like document retrieval or courtesy copy delivery.

Do you want to test whether a litigation support services provider is strategic partner material? Ask yourself whether the vendor is consultative and seems willing to work for the mutual benefit of both sides. If the vendor seems focused only on order fulfillment, they’re probably not.

Accountability and Performance

There is no substitute for data when it comes to measuring performance, and few things keep business partners accountable to each other like objective data that both sides can compare. Whether it’s days and hours associated with turnaround time, dollars and cents in receivables and payables, or filing acceptance rates by the court, the most important measures of success or failure should be transparently shared between partners.

What sorts of data should law firms look for? Here are three that every firm can use as a barometer of performance for their provider and themselves from Table 1:

• eFiling Turnaround Times
• Serve Success Rates
• User Behavior and Order Data

While those three measures can provide a high-level view of performance, there are more granular types of data that can elevate a law firm’s performance. Among the data sets a strategic partner can provide to help steer operational success are:

• Type of orders placed
• eFiling orders by county
• Service of process orders by service level and pricing zone
• Number of documents served (by days elapsed)
• Proofs of service returned (by days elapsed)

Few law firms have the staff and resources to pull together data of this scale and type. Firms that do business without such data risk having an unclear picture of their own performance. Furthermore, a firm that operates without this information can only guess at the level of performance its litigation support services provider delivers.

That is why it is essential to have access to these data sets at regular intervals—monthly and/or quarterly. Doing so keeps the strategic partnership strong by proving the provider’s performance to the law firm and proving the value of the law firm to the provider.

But big picture accountability is about more than just hard data. It’s also about who has your back.

When things go wrong it’s critical to have access to someone inside the provider’s organization who can address your concerns. It’s never a good sign when a vendor responds to your problems with silence or indifference. Seeing first-hand how a potential partner responds to a problem is the best barometer to discover whether a provider will be responsive to your needs or let you twist in the wind.

Fortunately, you don’t need to wait for a bona fide crisis to find out whether your provider is strategic partner material. The simple solution is to “ask around.”

Actively reach out to other firms to investigate the vendor’s track record and find out what their experience has been. Reaching out to your personal and professional networks may also bring you important perspective from people who have worked hands-on with a provider.

Make this inquiry even more complete by asking the provider for their performance metric reports.

Innovation

All law firms seek a competitive advantage. But it’s almost a sure bet that trying to gain that advantage from a vendor that follows the crowd will lead to disappointment. The best way to get that advantage, and to think differently about how a litigation support services provider can improve your strategic position, is to partner with one that is an innovator.

A partner that is an innovator will help provide a law firm first-to-market access that keeps you ahead of your competitors. Perhaps the best example of this is law firms that use court eFiling. It’s critical for these firms to have access to the greatest number of courts where eFiling is accepted–and not all litigation support service providers offer that.

Some providers will offer eFiling in just a few courts while others may offer it in many courts, or even most courts. However, a litigation support service provider that has the right stuff to be your strategic partner will provide electronic filing in every court where eFiling is allowed.

That may sound like a high bar, but it’s one that a true innovator meets by creating a proprietary file + serve technology platform that provides this level of access to its partners.

It is also the gold standard that other litigation support service providers continually chase.

Positive change from the inside

If what you and your litigation support services provider are doing right now isn’t strengthening your law firm’s competitive position, it’s time to start thinking differently about how to make that happen. Instead of trying to boost the bottom line by simply taking more cases, there are ways to strengthen your financial footing from within the firm.

This important change in mindset begins by questioning the status quo. Here are a few questions you can ask to get that process started, and help you change the way you see and use your litigation support services provider:

• Can this vendor help me improve my cash flow?
• How can this vendor help me track the firm’s performance?
• Can this vendor show the firm where it’s losing money?
• Can this vendor show the firm where it’s saving money?
• What can this vendor do to help me manage change?

Perception is everything

“Change the way you look at things and the things you look at change.” This statement from best-selling author, Wayne W. Dyer, EdD, challenges us to see the full potential in the tools, processes, and people around us. It is also instructive at a time when technology is driving transformation throughout the legal profession, and worth keeping in mind as you continue to look for a competitive edge.

Change is happening throughout the courts and legal profession, but change creates an ideal environment in which to think differently about how law firms and their litigation support providers influence each other’s growth. Make sure you’re prepared to thrive in that environment with clarity about your partners, your technology, and your firm’s position in the market.

And, whatever you do, don’t be Kodak.

A consultation with a Rapid Legal account executive will change the way you look at litigation support service providers today. Book a demo or schedule a call now.

When interviewing a new electronic filing service provider (EFSP) you want to cut through the hype, collect credible information, and find the best match for your firm. These questions will help in your decision-making process to evaluate any organization that wants to be a preferred vendor for your eFiling services.

Free Download: [Access Checklist Now]

#1: Scope of service

• How many California counties and courts does the EFSP serve with its court eFiling solution? It is far more productive and cost-effective to use an EFSP that eFiles into all California eFiling courts, not just some.
• Does the provider offer additional litigation services such as courtesy copy delivery and service of process?
• Does the EFSP have a well-documented performance and acceptance rate with the courts?

#2: Performance and productivity

• How many ways does the vendor deploy its eFiling and other litigation support services; through a portal, application programming interface (API) or both?
• If using the EFSP’s portal, is it user friendly and does it provide instant access to all the eFiling courts?
• Are court-stamped documents returned quickly and reliably? What about custom reports and analytics?
• Can the EFSP’s eFiling platform integrate with a law firm’s practice management system? Can the vendor provide interoperability with a law firm’s accounting systems to automate eFiling spend and reconciliation, and reduce manual record keeping?

#3: Domain knowledge and court filing expertise

• How much experience does the EFSP have in the California court system with eFiling and physical court services?
• What is the provider’s level of expertise and service offerings through its portal with courtesy copy delivery, document retrieval, service of process, and other related services?
• What customer support options does the provider offer? Is phone, chatbot, and other online options available?

#4: Performance metrics

• Does the EFSP provide performance metrics such as eFiling turnaround times for the various courts? Other important metrics include eFiling success rates, user behavior, and order data. Ask if they are available for review.
• Can the provider benchmark its acceptance rates and rejection rates against the rest of the industry?
• Your staff will perform routine work in submitting each eFiling order. Can the provider explain how that work is distributed across your law firm so you can assess efficiencies and productivity?

#5: References

• What is the eFiling service provider’s track record and history working with the courts?
• What do the courts say about this provider? Does it have references from the courts they work with?
• Does the EFSP have references from any of the courts’ electronic filing managers (EFM) vendors that integrate with the EFSP’s offering? These are companies that provide the actual efiling systems and court case management systems to the courts, so the vendor you select should have excellent relationships with them.

Let’s get started.

Rapid Legal has high marks in all these areas. Interested in evaluating us? Book a demo or create an account today.