[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Charter revision second draft
I think it is important to retain the current name (which we have had from the start) at least until after Blue has been completed. Reasons include that there is a substantial court interest in this work and, further, that the associated transactions envisioned, for example, in including e-service, relate to the judicial process and court cases. Even transactions, such as discovery exchange, which do not require direct involvement by the judge or clerk (except to enforce rules), would not take place except for there being a court case involved.
I reserve the right to be persuaded otherwise, but I think that such a change should be the product of deliberation and review - including discussion at a face-to-face meeting.
Regards,
Roger
Roger Winters Programs and Projects Manager King County 516 Third Avenue, E-609 MS: KCC-JA-0609 Seattle, Washington 98104 V: (206) 296-7838 F: (206) 296-0906
-----Original Message-----
Given our decision to include e-service in the scope of Blue, this makes sense to me. Jim Cabral
From: Dallas
Powell [mailto:dpowell@tybera.com] I would like throw out a change in naming from "Electronic Court Filing Technical Committee" to "Electronic Filing Technical Committee" and emphasize in our system as an environment for legal documents. The intent is ease the distinction between what we do and the data exchange environment for IJIS or attorney to attorney for notification which may not always require a court to intervene as was discussed in the f2f?
Dallas
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]