Electronic Filing (eFiling) has been a mainstay in litigation for a while now, offering a more efficient and accessible method for submitting documents to the court. The process is not without its challenges however. To this day, litigators will frequently make mistakes that can lead to delays and rejections, as well as incur additional costs. Understanding these pitfalls and how to avoid them is crucial to ensure a smooth workflow.

One of the most common reasons for court filing rejections is not paying court fees in the California Superior Courts. Traditionally, clerks would request fees at the window and the runner would cut a check. With eFiling, fees must be apportioned ahead of time and submitted along with the corresponding documents. It seems small, but this difference is the root cause of a significant number of eFiling rejections.

Because the California Superior Courts do not have a uniform process for eFiling, each court handles fees slightly differently. Some courts will attach specific fees to certain document codes while others will require the filing party to manually add the correct amount to their bill. Depending on the court, certain types of fees like Complex Fees and Jury Fees may not even be eligible for eFiling. Despite the wide range of differences between the courts, there is a simple way to check whether or not your filing is being submitted with the requisite fee advance. Whenever eFiling, double check your billing page before submitting. If you are advancing the correct amount, it will appear on your cost breakdown. Taking the extra second to diligently review your presumptive billing is often the only difference between a rejected eFiling and an accepted one.

Incomplete information is another avoidable issue litigators frequently encounter when eFiling. Because the courts have automated much of the filing process, they require filing parties to specify things like document titles, filing parties, and filing attorneys. Depending on the eFiling Service Provider (EFSP), you may not be able to continue without entering all requisite document information, but no EFSP will flag whether or not this information has been entered incorrectly. Taking the time to ensure that all sections pertaining to document information are filled out correctly is another way in which litigators can avoid automated eFiling rejections.

Document formatting can also be a common problem for litigators. Different courts have different requirements for how documents should be formatted and submitted, such as separating proofs versus attaching them or submitting stipulations as word documents versus PDFs. Again, depending on the EFSP in use litigators may or may not be prompted to address any document formatting issues. While certain service providers will prompt their users when local formatting rules vary from the norm, others may not. Ultimately, reviewing local court rules is the best way to avoid formatting based eFiling rejections; but in a world where eFiling costs are largely uniform, a simpler solution may be to shop around for an EFSP that goes the extra mile in notifying its customers about unusual formatting requirements.

Lastly, document codes themselves can be problematic when eFiling. Filings are frequently rejected because documents are not uploaded with the correct, corresponding document code (‘Motion’ for a Motion, for example). Because the California Superior Courts all operate independently of one another, there is no static list of documents to choose from. Different courts will have different lists, with differing degrees of thoroughness. Some courts may list every conceivable type of motion, others may only have one or two document codes encompassing all motions. When placing eFiling orders, it is essential to have the correct document code selected before submitting, as the courts can and do reject every filing that does not conform to their own standards. Unfortunately, there is no easy fix for this issue either. Because document codes are subject to change, EFSPs cannot buttress against potential rejections by automatically flagging incorrect selections. Instead, the best solution is simply using an EFSP with a diligent a responsive support team.

eFiling in the state of California can be a headache. Filings are often rejected for a number of procedural, formatting-based reasons that have little to do with the substance of the documents but can lead to delays and additional costs nevertheless. While these pitfalls can be frustrating, avoiding them can be surprisingly easy. Increased diligence combined with the right attorney service provider can do away with these rejections, removing at least one source of stress from the litigation process. If you would like to learn more about how eFiling and how to master it, or what we can do for you, feel free to give us a call at (800) 687-5003!