Addressing Issues with Submitting Documents

Occasionally when submitting a new case or subsequent filing on an existing case, you may run into the issue that the lead document, and more often attachments, are in a format that the courts can not or will not accept, causing your filing to be rejected. These rejections often provide little to no information as to why the document may have been rejected or failed.

Though there can be a number of things that could cause this, one of the more common issues we run into, is the formatting of the documents. The Indiana Court System is a bit particular in regards to what type of documents it will accept: 

* 50MB is the size limit of any individual document.

* 75MB is the total size allowed for the entire envelope.

* The maximum number of pages can not exceed 250 pages.

* Some fonts are not acceptable within the PDF document. (See examples below.)

Since getting a filing rejected may seem a bit arbitrary, and often the rejection message can lack the exact cause of it not being accepted, we wanted to provide a few points and tips to make this process go smoothly, at least in relation to the documents and attachments that you include in your filings.

#1 A good general rule of thumb is: If you (the submitter) did not create the lead or supporting documents in your filing, then you'll likely benefit from using a “Print to PDF function” to recreate the document(s) before submitting them. This process will often increase the size of the document, but helps by rendering unusual fonts as an image.

This is easily done by selecting the document(s), choosing the “print” option that should be available in the PDF viewing software you are using or familiar with, but instead of printing to a printer, use the drop down to select “Print to PDF”. This will create a “copy” of the original document, which you can then attach to your filing. Doing this will often fix any potential issues with the actual document, especially if you have run into the rejection wall, but are not sure why.

In general, this technique is used for attachments, since those are documents created by others, and hence must be rendered exactly, even if they include fonts unacceptable to the courts. On the other hand, lead documents will almost always be your own work, so in that case, you should just use the correct fonts (see below.) This technique can be used to fix up depositions that are created by specialized software using unusual fonts. 

#2 The Indiana Court System will only accept certain fonts in submitted documents. If  your document(s) do not use one of the fonts listed below, your documents may not be accepted:

Arial

Baskerville

Book Antiqua

Bookman

Bookman Old Style

Century

Century Schoolbook

Calisto MT

CG Times

Garamond

Georgia

New Baskerville

New Century Schoolbook

Palatino

Times New Roman

#3 Lastly, the Indiana Court System has published an E-filing guide which can be very helpful in ensuring your filings will be accepted. The E-Filing Guide provides a detailed explanation of the types and formats of documents that are allowed (and prohibited) to be submitted.  Please see pages 21 - 24 at the link below:

https://www.in.gov/courts/files/efiling-user-guide.pdf

The guide also provides instructions, if you need to submit something to the court that cannot be converted to PDF format.

Amended local rules recently approved by the Indiana Supreme Court.

The local Rules for Clark, Delaware, Johnson and Hancock County Courts have been amended. 

Local attorneys are probably aware of these, but if you're an out-of-county attorney who only files into these counties periodically, it's  worth knowing that they've changed. Note that the links below include only the amendments, not the entire local set of rules, so each is a quick read to keep you up do date.

25S-MS-10

Order Approving Amended Local Rules for Clark County

25S-MS-11
Order Approving Amended Local Rules for Delaware County

25S-MS-4
Order Approving Amended Local Rules for Johnson County

25S-MS-8
Order Approving Amended Local Rule for Hancock County

Jefferson County Recorded Documents now available on Doxpop!

Please join us in welcoming the Jefferson County Recorder's Office to our Doxpop network! The new Recorder, Amy Stephens, has been working to update the office and its services, and has added online search access as well as Property Watch to her county.

Jefferson County's Recorded Document index and images are now searchable at https://www.doxpop.com/prod/in/recorder/FindRecordedDocuments, where you can find advanced search features such as date range, document type, and legal description, along with a superior name search that locates names in any order and includes nicknames and common misspellings. Document PDFs can be purchased and downloaded instantly as well.

Document index data and images begin in Jefferson County January 1, 1993, and are searchable through their current index within 10 minutes. Please note that document numbers have changed formats through the years as shown here:

• 1993 through 1997: 4 digits with no year, for example 2965, 5319
• 1998 through 1999: 6 digits with 2-digit year, for example 980019, 990132
• 2000 through 2003: 8 digits with 4-digit year, for example 20010027, 20038243
• 2004 and later: 9 digits with 4-digit year, for example 200405829, 202303561

Oversized documents such as Plats and Surveys do not yet have images available to purchase and download, but you can contact the Recorder's Office to retrieve those copies as we work to add them to the system.

Jefferson County is also available on the Doxpop Property Watch alert system at https://watch.doxpop.com/property/! 

Quickly set an alert on your name, and any properties you select, to be notified when a matching document is filed in the Recorder's Office. This service is provided to the public of Jefferson County at no cost to you on behalf of the Recorder.

Thank you again to Amy Stephens, her staff, and Jefferson County for their partnership in offering Doxpop online access. For questions, concerns, or assistance with any Doxpop service, please contact us at support@doxpop.com or 866-369-7671.

New year, new rules: Three New Case Types

 Beginning on 1/1/2025, Three new types will be available to filers:

CE is the new filing type for cases eligible for the Commercial Court Docket. The general purpose of commercial courts is to provide venues that are adept at managing the complexities of commercial litigation. Permanent commercial courts have been established in Allen, Elkhart, Vanderburgh, Floyd, Lake, and Marion counties, but the case type is available in all jurisdictions. This case type can be used for initial filings via the e-filing system. Civil filing fees and a jury fee are required.

• Eligibility Requirements.
• Cases that are not eligible.
• Commercial Court Rules.
• Handbook and library of forms.

GV is the new filing type for cases petitioning for grandparent visitation per IC 31-17-5. Cases can be initiated for this type via the e-filing system, and the regular civil filing fee applies.

RA  is the new filing type for Review of an Administrative Agency Decision per I.C. 4-21.5-5.

The new Case Type Quick Reference Guide includes these additions. Having this document or a link to it is something we recommend to all of the e-filers we work with.

Here is the order that adds these three new case types.

Henry County Recorded Documents leaving Doxpop

 

The Henry County Recorder's Office will be changing software systems in January 2025. This new system is not part of the Doxpop network, and so their documents and services will no longer be available via Doxpop once this transition is completed. 

The planned start date for the new system is January 1st, 2025 and we will be working to help make sure that the transition goes as smoothly as possible for users. Once the transition is complete, Henry County recorded documents will be available through Tapestry at https://www.landrecords.com. High volume users can inquire about additional services by calling the Recorder's Office at (765) 529-4304 during operating hours:

Monday Closed;  Tuesday through Thursday 7 AM to 5 PM;  Friday 7 AM to 4 PM

Doxpop Property Watch alerts will also halt when Doxpop stops receiving updates from Henry County on January 1st. We will notify all current users with instructions for setting up new alerts at that time.

Note: We will keep Henry County on our system for a couple of weeks after the transition to ensure that the new system is working well before we shut down access through Doxpop, but it is important to know that any documents filed after 12/27/2024 will not be found on Doxpop.

Please join us in thanking Henry County and their staff for many years of partnership and public service!

On Tuesday, 10/22, We'll be rolling back the changes to the document preview system for Recorded Documents.

 Last week, we made a major change to our document preview system to prevent theft. (Details here.)

Within hours, we began receiving feedback from Doxpop users who had come to depend on the "scrolling pane" preview system that we have used for many years. Apparently that method of previewing documents has been built into many business processes, and the sudden change ruined the week for many people. 

Although the change was made for good reasons that will have to be addressed in the long run, we obviously screwed up by not understanding the value that the scrolling pane system provides. We're going to put the old preview back, and then spend some more time looking for a better solution. Thanks to everyone who provided immediate feedback. We needed to hear your message, and we appreciate it.

So... What's next? We still have to deal with the image theft that is occurring for several important reasons:

1. Indiana and Michigan Statutes make it clear that copy fee income is to be used as a partial funding source for Recorders (Indiana) and Registers of Deeds (Michigan.) If we allow this theft to continue, it ultimately hurts the taxpayers.
2. The majority of businesses that don't engage in theft are forced to compete with the few dishonest businesses that reduce their expenses through thievery. That's not fair.
3. Doxpop has an obligation to protect the Recorders & Registers we work with. We are aware from observing other vendors that when companies who work with public offices don't take the trust that is placed in them seriously, substantial losses can occur in a very short time.

We'll be revisiting our options in the next few weeks, and we'll be reaching out to everyone who got in touch with us about the problems that removing the original preview system caused.

If you sent us an email or left a phone number when you commented last week, we'll be back in touch this week to seek your input. If you left an anonymous comment on the blog, or just haven't been in touch yet, but have thoughts to pass along, please email support@doxpop.com to let us know how you use the scrolling pane preview system so we can preserve that value for you to the extent possible.

A Significant Change to the Recorded Document Preview System

Beginning on Tuesday, 10/15/24, Doxpop will be changing our document preview system. The old approach of providing a scrolling "slice" of the document image so you could read a document without printing it was being abused by organizations who where taking snapshots of all of the pieces of a document and then electronically "taping" them together in order to avoid paying the copy fees that the Recorder and Registers offices collect.

To address this, we have been forced to provide only half of each page for visual inspection. We believe this is still enough for you to be able to confirm that you've found the right document before purchasing it, and to select the necessary pages in situations where you don't need the entire document. We recognize that this may not serve the needs of folks who want to read a document without purchasing it. That's a loss forced on all of us by bad actors.

We apologize to the honest people who just lost a nice feature due to the dishonest actions of a few. We didn't want to do this, but inaction would not be fair to the taxpayers who have to make up the shortfall when Recorders and Registers lose copy fee income to scammers. It's also not fair to force those of you who use our system professionally to compete with businesses that cheat in order to reduce their costs in a manner that honest business people don't.

Follow-up, added 10/17/24:

We've received a lot of negative feedback on this change. This is not entirely unexpected, because we didn't want to make this change either. We invested quite a bit in the previous "sliding pane" preview and were proud of how it provided people with the ability to read documents without purchasing a copy. We thought it was a great solution, and only stopped using it because we were forced to. 

I'll follow up directly with every person who provided contact information in a comment or email. Anonymous comments won't show up on this blog, and of course I have no way to reach you if you made an anonymous comment, so I'll try to address some of those comments here:

First, this change was not made to increase Doxpop's income. We pass along the copy fees directly to the Recorders offices. The only upcharge is on extremely low volume accounts where we charge more than the $1 fee in order to cover transaction costs and not take a loss on small purchases. The vast majority of our users pay $1/page, which all goes to the Recorder. Copy fees are essentially a revenue neutral pass-through for Doxpop.

We don't make the rules, but we have have to follow them. A couple of folks expressed anger that they have to pay copy fees at all and wonder if we and the Recorder should be allowed to do this. The answer is that we're not only allowed, we're required to charge this fee. A copy fee for Recorded Documents has been required by legislation for decades and because the revenue from copy fees has long been a reliable part of every Recorder's budget, all counties allocate less tax funding to Recorder's offices. Eliminating the fee is not something Doxpop or a Recorder can just decide to do. It would require a restructuring of funding in every county and almost certainly an act of the State legislature.

Yes, there really are people who made the effort to write a program to download all of the little pieces in our sliding pane preview system to avoid paying copy fees. We responded to solid evidence, not a vague worry. Doxpop was fortunate enough to catch this early so we can prevent serious abuse. One of our competitors who didn't take strong action previously had hundreds of thousands of pages of images stolen from their Recorder partners through a similar hack, and we've learned from their unfortunate experience. We don't have the option to just ignore theft, because we are contractually obligated to prevent theft and collect the copy fees for every image that is provided through our system.

There is one positive aspect to this... The businesses stealing images are competing with legitimate businesses that follow the rules and pay for copies. That means many of you have been subjected to unfair competition in the past. This puts a stop to that in the counties we work with.

Are there other options? Maybe... That's why I'll be following up with anyone who provides contact information and is open to a positive discussion.

Doxpop can't ignore theft, and we can't change the rules we work under. However, we are open to any creative ideas to make our system meet your needs given those restrictions.

For instance, if changing the area that is blurred on each page can be done in a way that reveals most useful information without allowing theft of the image, we will certainly be willing to adjust that.

There might be ways to provide better access for local users who are willing to sign a contract with substantial penalties for theft. We are not willing to put ourselves in a position where we have to be constantly chasing miscreants in court, but anything short of that is on the table.

Footnote on terminology: I've used the term "Recorder" above to refer to both Indiana Recorders and Michigan Registers of Deeds. These offices with slightly different names operate in roughly the same manner in both States.