Phila. Court's Online Docket Falters Again as Lawyers Face Filing System Roadblocks
Although the recent problem appears to be limited mostly to the online docket search function, attorneys in Philadelphia who regularly rely on the court's online system say the recent development comes after they have experienced lingering problems in the wake of the hack.
August 21, 2019 at 05:34 PM
4 minute read
The First Judicial District’s online docket search function stopped working Wednesday, less than two months after the First Judicial System‘s online filing system was shuttered for six weeks in an effort to contain what officials called a “virus intrusion.”
Although the recent problem appears to be limited mostly to the online docket search function, attorneys in Philadelphia who regularly rely on the court’s online system say the recent development comes after they have experienced lingering problems in the wake of the hack.
“It’s nonstop problems,” Marciano & MacAvoy attorney Kevin Marciano said. “Sometimes you can’t even get on. Sometimes you can’t file stuff once you get on.”
“I’m sure they’re trying to work the bugs out,” Marciano added. “We’re being patient, but it is taking up more man hours to do something we’re so used to doing.”
Along with problems accessing the online docket, attorneys who spoke with The Legal primarily reported periodic trouble filing dockets online, and opening hyperlinked documents sent to them by the court system.
“For the most part the court’s filing system works pretty well. There are sporadic periods where [a given filing] can’t be found on the server,” Nancy Winkler of Eisenberg, Rothweiler, Winkler, Eisenberg & Jeck said.
Messa & Associates attorney Joseph Messa said his firm has been experiencing access problems too, although he said the problem did not appear to be systemic.
“It certainly hasn’t been all the time,” he said. “It makes you realize how important electronic filing is and how much you rely on it.”
Gabriel Roberts, a spokesman for the FJD, said that the online search function for the Common Pleas Civil and Orphans’ Court dockets have been temporarily suspended due to “application maintenance.” He did not have an exact timeframe for when the online search function will be back online, however, he noted that the court is continuing to address tech issues as they arise.
“While the public-facing applications that we have are largely functional at this point, we are always making improvements to the system, especially following the events in May,” he said.
The court’s website was initially shut down in late May to “safeguard” its systems after the FJD experienced what a city spokesman said was a “virus intrusion on a limited number of computers.”
The shutdown, however, left the First Judicial District’s website, online civil docket search and the e-filing system for civil and criminal cases inaccessible for six weeks. Public access to court filings through the city’s public computers for criminal records, filings, motions and appeals were also down.
The court has been circumspect about the intrusion that occurred.
During the weeks officials worked to get the court’s online systems back online, attorneys resorted to using couriers to file papers, and resorted to the honor system when it came to notifying parties that motions had been filed. Several law firms also began imposing internal deadlines that required lawyers to draft filings far in advance of the court-mandated filing deadlines in case couriers experienced traffic or long lines at the court.
Marciano said his office is still operating under a self-imposed deadline.
“It’s just taking longer,” Marciano said. “If you don’t file something online, and it’s time-sensitive, then you have to send it down by courier.”
Attorneys said they were trying to be patient, since the e-filing system going down over the summer was a strain not only on attorneys, but on the court itself, and they were hopeful the problems would be resolved soon.
“I think all the lawyers understand that it’s a work in progress,” Marciano said. “We got a taste of what it used to be like and it really wasn’t a lot of fun.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllUS Law Firm Leasing Up Nearly 30% Through Q3, With a Growing Number of Firms Staying in Place
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1People in the News—Nov. 26, 2024—Barley Snyder, McNees
- 2Akin, Baker Botts, Vinson & Elkins Are First Texas Big Law Firms to Match Milbank Bonuses
- 3Walking a Minute in Your Adversary’s Shoes: Addressing the Issue of 'Naive Realism' at Mediation
- 4The Moving Goalposts of Overtime Exemption: Texas Judge Invalidates 2024 Salary Threshold Rule
- 5New Research Study Predicts Continued Growth for Generative AI in Legal
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250