The e-future.

I have to take issue with Daniel Kortenhaus' August 1 letter expressing his misgivings on the viability of the e-filing process.

E-filing, electronic access, and e-service not only save the taxpayers and litigants the tremendous cost associated with handling paper court records, these systems also provide efficiency for the court, the parties, and all other agencies and entities that use the court system. Electronic access also allows the public easy access to the public records of the judicial branch of government, which fosters a better understanding of the court system and improved accountability and transparency.

Emailing is not e-filing. E-filing is the electronic filing of pleadings with the clerk. Because e-filers have to log in through secure servers to e-file, the integrity of the court record is much more secure than the paper system where the clerk receives an envelope in the mail from some unknown source. Mr. Kortenhaus' letter refers to pro se litigants sending him numerous emails. Paper system or not, any pro se litigant can email opposing counsel. If a pro se litigant files multiple superfluous pleadings with the court, the court can place a check on that just as is done in situations where multiple paper documents are filed.

State attorneys have retracted their opposition to e-filing and will learn, as local private attorneys have, that once you become familiar with this very simple system, e-filing is much more efficient and faster than paper filing. The e-filing rule also provides that an attorney who still uses a Smith Corona selectric can petition the court to continue to file in paper--I suggest that will be a rarely used provision in this day and age of word processing.

Pro se litigants are, in fact, not...