Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Court Procedure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State marshals, restraining-order advocates back bill to let attorneys and agencies email process for service
Summary
State marshals and shelter advocates supported a bill to let attorneys and public agencies electronically transmit documents to state marshals for service; advocates asked clarifying edits to ensure victims of domestic violence are not charged for electronic transmission or printing costs.
Hartford ' State marshals and advocates pressed the Judiciary Committee to approve language allowing attorneys and public agencies to electronically transmit documents to state marshals for service, and they asked technical edits to ensure that victims seeking restraining orders do not pick up transmission or printing fees.
Brian Mezick, president of the State Marshals Association, testified that current law does not explicitly permit attorneys or agencies to email process and that the proposed changes would modernize service of process while preserving current safeguards. "We're acutely aware that there are situations where attorneys need papers served with a quick turnaround," Mezick said. The bill would allow a marshal to receive an emailed PDF, print it and serve it; the bill sets a modest fee to compensate the marshal for the extra administrative task, he said.
Liza Andrews of the Connecticut Coalition Against Domestic Violence supported electronic service in concept but asked the committee to clarify that any fees for electronic transmission or printing are not charged to domestic-violence victims. She pointed to federal STOP grant conditions that require states not to shift filing or service costs to victims. "We just don't want a situation where there's anything that would lead the applicant to have to have an attorney to do electronic transmission," Andrews said.
Committee members pressed for technical clarifications and asked marshals and judicial-branch staff to coordinate on final drafting to ensure the change helps pro se applicants as well as practitioners. The bill maker and marshals said they would work with judicial branch staff to reconcile language on who may transmit documents and when marshals must accept electronic service.
No vote was recorded at the hearing; the marshals and advocates asked the committee for minor drafting changes to prevent unintended costs for survivors and to ensure marshals can accept emailed process from private parties where appropriate.
