Supreme Court hears e-mail arguments

Historic City News editor Michael Gold has long been a proponent of digital communications in public administration, and, yesterday, Florida Supreme Court justices heard oral arguments regarding a move to require lawyers to send most pleadings by e-mail — rather than through paper documents.

“The legislative and executive branches have embraced electronic communication — our current president is well known as “the facebook president”, Gold said in a statement. “The fourth estate couldn’t operate without it, so, why should the judiciary cling to rules of procedure envisioned fifty or even a hundred years ago?”

The Florida Bar is backing the significant change to how information is received between lawyers; so, it is more than possible that Florida lawyers may soon be faced with the realities of the 21st century.

While the new rule, in its current form, does not prohibit paper copies of pleadings being made, it would require exchanging those pleadings through email instead of through traditional mail.

“At Historic City News, we thank our readers every day for supporting free, local news — without creating paper waste and destroying the environment with ink contaminants,” Gold said. “E-mail communications can be made with security, accuracy and in an instant. Why any environmentally conscious attorney would not get out in support this change is beyond me.”

One Ft. Lauderdale attorney who did speak to reporters in published reports said, “While people will be reluctant to change, the efficiency and cost savings the change will bring are reasons to embrace digital technology over paper. Without much question the system will save a ton of money if this is implemented. This is not a difficult decision, on a cost level.”

A central Florida attorney, Matthew Capstraw from Longwood, argues in one report today that there are “possible security issues” with this change. He also questions why rules should mandate exchanges through e-mail when, he says, many lawyers already do so. “We do e-mail each other, but, we have the choice to do so.”

Supreme Court Justice Peggy Quince voiced her own concerns, stating that important e-mail can wind up in your “spam folder” or sent to a “junk mailbox” — never to be seen. She ultimately suggested the idea of phasing in such a change, but, lawyers said that if it was going to be done it needed to be done at one time.