IN RE: AMENDMENTS TO the FLORIDA RULES OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION AND FLORIDA RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3.030 - ELECTRONIC FILING AND SERVICE (2021)

On December 31, 2019, the Rules of Judicial Administration Committee (RJAC) and the Criminal Procedure Rules Committee (CrimPRC) filed a joint report proposing amendments to several Rules of Judicial Administration and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.030 (Service and Filing of Pleadings, Papers, and Documents). According to the report, the committees proposed the amendments “in reaction to the electronic filing and service advancements within the courts and legal profession.” Joint Out-of-Cycle Report of the Rules of Judicial Administration and Criminal Procedure Rules Committees, at 1. Most of the proposals are from the committees’ review of the rules; however, the RJAC also proposes amendments in response to this Court's February 11, 2019, referral regarding Wheaton v. Wheaton, 261 So. 3d 1236 (Fla. 2019), wherein a majority of this Court held that a proposal for settlement was not subject to the service requirements of Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516 (Service of Pleadings and Documents).

First, the RJAC proposes this Court adopt new Florida Rules of Judicial Administration 2.345 (Electronic Signature of Court Official) and 2.511 (Florida Courts E-Filing Portal). Proposed new rule 2.345 defines when an electronic signature from a justice, judge, magistrate, clerk, or other court official is complete. Proposed new rule 2.511 defines the Florida Court's E-filing Portal, specifies the credentials for access to the portal, and establishes the governance structure for the portal. The RJAC also proposes this Court adopt amendments, some of which are substantial, to rules 2.514 (Computing and Extending Time), 2.515 (Signature and Certificates of Attorneys and Parties), 2.516 (Service of Pleadings and Documents), 2.520 (Documents), and 2.525 (Electronic Filing). In response to the RJAC's proposed amendments discussed above, the CrimPRC proposes amendments to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.030 (Service and Filing of Pleadings, Papers, and Documents).

The rule amendments were approved by each respective committee, and the Florida Bar Board of Governors (Board) unanimously approved the proposals. The proposals were published for comment before they were filed with the Court. The RJAC received comments from the Civil Procedure Rules Committee (CivPRC), Kimberly Bocelli, the Florida Probate Rules Committee (FPRC), and Former Judge Steven Scott Stephens. Upon consideration of the comments, the RJAC made some changes to its proposed amendments before submitting them to the Court.

After the committees’ report was filed with the Court, the Court published the proposals for comment. The Court received nine comments. Comments from the Florida Courts E-Filing Authority (Authority), Former Judge Stephens, Attorney Thomas D. Hall, and the Florida Association of Court Clerks (FACC) are generally in support of the proposed amendments; however, they include suggested changes to the proposals that they ask the Court to consider. The comment from the Juvenile Court Rules Committee is neither in support nor against the proposals, but instead, explains the potential effects of the proposals on the Juvenile Court Rules. Comments from the CivPRC, the FPRC, Attorney Laird A. Lile, and the Southern Legal Counsel raise numerous concerns with the proposed rule amendments.

Thereafter, the ad hoc subcommittee, which was responsible for the development of these proposed amendments, reviewed the comments, and the RJAC filed a response to the comments. Although many comments did not result in changes to the proposals, the RJAC made some changes to its proposed rule amendments in consideration of the comments received. Prior to submitting the revised proposed amendments to this Court, the RJAC submitted them to the Board for acceptance. A member of the Board expressed opposition to the revised proposed amendments, concerned that they did not go far enough in accepting suggestions made in certain comments. The Board then voted not to accept the revised proposed amendments, notwithstanding its prior acceptance. In submitting its revised proposed amendments to the Court, the RJAC suggested that some comments may warrant review by the Court and may result in the Court further amending the rules after complete analysis.

Oral argument was held in this case, wherein the Court heard argument from the RJAC as well as six commenters, including the FACC, the CivPRC, Mr. Hall, Former Judge Stephens, the FPRC, and Mr. Lile.

Having reviewed the proposed amendments and comments and heard from the various committees and commenters, we do not adopt the proposed amendments as presented to the Court. Although the RJAC has been working on these proposals for a lengthy time period, the Board, the RJAC itself, the CivPRC, the FPRC, Mr. Hall, Former Judge Stephens, and Mr. Lile, agree that other changes should be made to the proposals. Many of these other changes are significant, so much so that the Board declined to approve the RJAC's revised proposed amendments even though it had approved the initial proposed amendments.

We have been urged by the RJAC to adopt agreed-upon changes and those that require only minor changes by the Court to the amendments proposed. We decline the invitation for the Court to perform this exercise. Instead, we request the RJAC to re-engage with the interested parties and resubmit a proposal in more final form, with greater consensus and narrowed issues. To the extent there are agreed-to changes that can be separated from the matters in dispute that require additional work, the RJAC may resubmit those proposed changes in final form for consideration by the Court. Any resubmissions must be filed in new cases after submission to the Board.

We thank the members of all the committees and commenters who have worked on these proposed amendments.

A True Copy

Test:

John A. Tomasino

Clerk, Supreme Court

CANADY, C.J., and POLSTON, LABARGA, LAWSON, MUÑIZ, COURIEL, and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.