good morning honors please the court diane potts a sin attorney general on behalf of the people of the state of illinois counsel your honour's the ability to create transmit and store elect legal documents electronically has created virtual courthouses throughout the nation under this court's even business initiative it's the expectation and goal of the courts here in illinois to be part of a uniform system for electronic filing in the next few years the sweeping movement away from paper toward electronic management of legal documents highlights the importance of this issue at the heart of this case judge does a jurisdictionally required rehearing application filed electronically at five thirty four pm have the same force a fact and protection as a rehearing out of cation mailed at five thirty four pm the people asked this court to hold that it does and reverse the appellate court's decision dismissing the people's appeal reversal is also justified on an alternate and completely independent ground that the people's application for a hearing was undisputedly filed within thirty days of service of the commission's corrected order don't we h address that issue first because if it was if it ran from a later date it's time to file your honor on the appellate court although both grounds were presented to it and chose to address the  e file ing issue and found that the people's application for a hearing was untimely under the commission's rules that's the reason why any did it express no opinion whatsoever on and the  think that the state is required to defend and prosecute so many appeals do you really want that to be the rule were isn't there a little uncertainty as to what then would constitute the time your honor in this case under the narrow on the statutory language that this court has before it i would argue that you know it wouldn't wreak havoc with with appeals and with timing for appeals we've got a very specific language that the general assembly placed in section ten dash thirteen a that provided that any order rescinding altering or amending a prior just s shall have the same force and effect as that original border most most laws don't have that so you would have if absent this language i would agree with eighteen t that a minor correction of a clerical error wouldn't have the reste wouldn't restart the time for filing an application for hearing but because the language and section tend as one thirteen a is so clear and on in big us and provides for no substantive versus clerical error judgments that it has to be given fact as written  any order the parties may apply for a hearing and if you give the corrected order the same force in a fact then that september seventh service starts the time for filing the application for hearing but that said electronic filing at the commission has been going on for eight years and the prevalent practice there is to use electronic filing because the eve filing is so important to all the parties that appear before the commission we've asked this court to to reach that issue and for the reasons that i will  deaths thirteen a it would be assessed try construction and so whether the parties you know wanted to get the rehearing applications and within thirty days of the original order or within thirty days of the corrected corrected order starts everything afterwards i mean would that void out the act over second finally because there was a corrective order well not much would the notice of appeal might be premature there was a applications from within thirty days of either of those states without losing without losing jurisdiction so it doesn't say section ten as thirteen does not say that that corrected order honor i think the emphasis has to be on of protecting the right to an appeal and here the people's right to review of the commission's orders was denied and that is that was wrong and the interpretation of either section tundish thirteen a or the commission's rules on electronic filing do not justify that the punishment really that that that that the  people had for using the more efficient less cumbersome eve filing system versus putting it with automatic receipt versus putting it into the mail with receipt several days single day single time no i think this is the most severe cutting off an appellate right because we used the system that the commission no i'm talking about you are asking us three o three i believe a d that talks about if you've got a timely judgment motion pending and you take a premature appeal you're protected you've protected your appellate rights you're asking for well you don't have a timely post or you don't have a timely motion pending when you did we did your honor because it was filed within the requisite thirty days of the original order it was certainly filed within thirteen applies and the service of the september seventh order starts the thirty day clock and we are entitled to file an application for a hearing up until i think it's october t so october second filing was clearly time i your honour's i think it's important to recognize that nearly ten years ago the electronic commerce security act the journal assembly enacted this ad to encourage and protect the use of electronic commerce in illinois and the central purpose of this act was to facilitate the electronic filing with the state agencies such as the commission and the ma regulation read read with subsection a provides for the chance to for the clerk to review the document for completeness and it actually says that the filing of electronic document is effective upon acceptance of the complete document and if applicable any required original paper verification or affidavit pages by the chief clerk of the commission any required verification or affidavit pages whether they be in electronic format or people averse and must be received and accepted by the chief clerk for purposes of meeting filing deadlines unless otherwise specified by the commission or the hearing or hear your honour's as a first point the hearing examiner specifically found that the people's application was filed at october second so even if it wasn't on complete form which it was certainly incomplete form we've got we've met the meeting the filing deadline language of subsection d of two hundred dash time forty going to the first sentence it doesn't say that a document is not filed untold reviewed for complete and i want to go back so i understand if i'm less otherwise specified by the commission there wasn't a specific specification commish was there there was just no objection at the  time it's either commission or hearing officer and in fact we did have a specific finding from the hearing officer that it was filed on october second so the hearing officer did specify otherwise if you were to read this this regulation as eighteen t is asking this court to but i'd urge this quarter not to did that and look can i ask a couple questions about the there the meaning of receipt by the chief clerk it bothered me when i read read the because i had no idea what that meant to get mean that this one person could be the only person who could receive it and he could choose to receive it or not receive it any time he wished if that day he stayed to five thirty and just wanted to do something you interpret a fight if you want to target the commissions rules as tying a filing deadline to the clerk's personal acceptance of the document you're creating a whole host of problems that your hon has recognize a document that comes in at four fifty nine pm it's not going to be reviewed for completeness that day and if but if the if the clerk or to stay late a document that comes in at five thirty four on another day ma fact be reviewed and be deemed filey by lee timely your honour's this interpretation is not justified by the wording of suction b when a court or an agency in ten has to have a five pm deadline they have a regulation that clearly provides for a five pm deadline or a regulation that says anything submitted after five pm is going to be given and next business day filing date and if you look at eighteen t s brief at pages eighteen to twenty we see the language that courts use if they want such a rule filing and if you look at it in total it just shows that simply nice things that eve filing once were old affective one court complete it's ready to be ruled upon it doesn't mean that it was five like that it was filed and i would also point this court to the language of tundish thirteen that doesn't even talk about the filing of  it talks about applying for a rehearing and it's undisputed that the people applied for a rehearing on october second using the system that the commission has had in effect for eight years and the system that the commission has itself interpreted as allowing post five pm filings of documents there is a minority of course out there that a impose a five pm deadline and it's a minority because most courts that have electronic filing recognize that filing over the  your honor i think this is the parties would agree that this case is squarely before this court as an issue of regulatory interpretation does the commission's regulations mean what  said they mean but i think the agency is entitle to interpret its own regulations and the fact that in eighty years it has never deemed any document file filed after five pm to be untimely moss weigh against a change that not only affects the people in this case but would affect all the parties appearing before the commission and without disclaimer on the receipt isn't there a disclaimer that says the is tronic files and not officially filed with the commerce commission until reviewed for compliance with commission rules and accepted by commission personnel not as a chief of mission personnel yes around or three points that is not the language that's used in the commission's rules so if there is a discrepancy between a disclaimer on a receipt and the commission's rules the commission's rol prevail second the fact that there is that disclaimer i would ask this court to read that in conjunction with the the the regulation and its habits served as merely a protection for the commission to bonge incomplete filings to decide if something's incomplete in the parties haven't remedy it doesn't have to find that document to be effective  made there was people had no idea that this challenge was going to be mounted to the regularly fire regular practices of the commission and therefore for all these reasons ron or  good morning i'm sure metropolis of mayor brown appearing on behalf of illinois bell telephone company the respondent happily may please the court in order to appeal from a commerce commission decision it is a statutory simply for administrative purposes if a filing is made during business hours when the chief clerk is there to accept it and when it can be possibly excepted as the rule requires then the commission deems it to have been filed at that time on that da matters and if the same information had been sent to you by the mail and there was an affidavit that said that it had been mailed it five or five thirty four and you receive that document with that suffer the same time we did this problems that the electronic would know because there's a separate mailbox rule for mailbox violence in this designed to compensate people for the time it takes to for a document to cross the state or across distance by mail here with an electronic filing it's instantaneous there's no disadvantage there's nothing to compensate for it's even faster than physical filing if i walked out of here right now and filed something down the street in the commission's office in springfield clerk and you're going to get in again you're requiring an acceptance by the chief clerk they look at it because they stamp it with an electronic filing it's the same thing because again it's the faster it gets even faster than physical filing and you may require acceptance by the chief clerk as a matter of administrative pravin what about the disclaimer doesn't require schieffer but accepted by commissioners i think that's just a shorthand for the chief clerk's office as you know with the chief clerk or his designees working with with them result no i think it's actually it's perfectly rational for the commission to want filings during business hours because that way if there's a problem with your computer or with the file or with the commission's computers there's somebody there at the clerk's office to help you out so that's perfectly rational now what result is it have an attorneys as we practice in front of the commission it doesn't discourage us from filing electronically filing electronically is great we love it just as much as they do all the deadline does and we have to have some deadline at some time during the day all the deadline does it doesn't discourage us from filing electronically it discourages us from filing late it just means that we as attorneys have to do they have to figure out what we've got to do to get on file on time the way we do every day deadlines are a fact of life for attorneys that we deal with all the time now as it happens if something goes crazy at the very last minute we've got this nice little backstop of the mailbox for all but when we practice we don't think about it that way like i want to file by mail because i've got the mailbox reports i'm going to file by five pm and get that nice electronic you know cheaper filing it gives me that nice receipt that says i'm on file today i don't have to worry about the mail get whether the mails going to get through or anything like that i'm been on file council yes why would you have to worry about whether the mail gets through if you've mailed it in time if you if you've mailed it you have an affidavit to that effect if i have but if well i always work you always worry about the case so what happens if it got lost in the mail somewhere and it's never retrieved now you could have but you could do an affidavit but then you know who knows if you will you never have you never want to have those issues come up how is and i just thought you were speaking the problems that you might have with the mail at the last minute and the problems you might have with the computer overnight i post kind of the same generically the same kind of problems i'm not sure i mean  you have to be there to see if there's any problems with your computer upon the receipt and then you want he finally to happen during the day when there's people people around that's correct and so then basically well i'm saying if you have the same kinds of problems with with mail that she would have with the filing but if the e file only occurs during business hours i will i we know from the commission's computers that it's been received during business hours i've got it i've got the time and i know that it's there it's come in during business hours when the chief clerk was there to accept it and i know that it's there and with me only there is there's always that uncertainty of you know ok well i've got to make sure i hope it gets delivered tomorrow is there anything of record would show the documents attempted to be in person or at rejected for some reason there's no statistical data but if you look at the commission's official electronic docket which was included in full in our supplemental  electronic file in person or in person if let's say that something wasn't signed or let's say that like a you know in the in the case of the court if your certificate of compliance with the brief page limits wasn't there that's what you that's what you go there to get for the  is that sort of satisfaction out yes the clerk was there they saw it they saw everything they go through and they check everything to be sure that that's all there and i'm on file and i got that stamp and i'm coming back to the office with that stamp m troubles if we would agree with if the court comes out with the same interpretation you would have us agree with him the i c c doesn't like it they could always amend the statute right the commission is always free to absolutely not your honor the commission's order denying my opponents have a patient clearly says that it was filed october three which is one day late the commission's official electronic docket sheet says october three one day late now the fact that they haven't denied past filings it tells you two things one the vast majority of filings at the commission are not statutory they're not jurisdictional so it doesn't matter to the parties or to the commission and second it tells you when we get to statutory jurisdictional filings attorneys are doing their job they understand the rule they understand the instructions that appear on the commission's website that tell you hate receipt is not acceptance even must get accepted and then you get the receipt th comes after you get the filing that tells you yes it's been uploaded but it has to be accepted you've got to get acceptance it make the rule in the website make it very clear painfully clear that receipt is not acceptance and acceptance  up the trains are finally on time i could ask a follow up question so it seemed to me that mr potts said to us that the practice for eight years in the commission has to do not invoke this this rule is five pm or i can call and to receive documents after five pm i don't know actually i would say that the practice of the commission is as is evident from its official records if a document is filed during business hours it's considered to have been filed that day but if it's filed after business hours it's considered to have been filed the following day the midnight is just a sort of a an administration has unions and i got to try to ask the question has there been another case in which the the commission challenge the filing finding of a document because it came in after fight there was the proceeding there was a case in two thousand and one involving rhythms links where the commission tonight a rehearing application because it was untimely for the very same reasons that we've talked about here reconsideration but as was as we showed in our brief that's because likely the commission had issued a mandatory order in the interim that was specifically styled there's a mandatory order to change the parties legal document after five pm and never a challenge not with in the case of a statutory jurisdictional requirement we just never run across a our opponents either just don't bother to appeal from the denial of the application for rehearing or when they do they need no old enough to get in on time any waiver problem here absolutely not your honor the commission's work the commission's rules didn't give us an opportunity to respond to my opponent's application in the first place second subject matter jurisdiction and that's what this is cannot be wait and third we have nothing to complain about the commission's official records agreed with us that the filing date was october three the commission's order denying rehearing said october three we greet we ha nothing to appeal from we have nothing to tell them but counsel isn't the october three day something the computer just kicks out as opposed to someone actually making that determination that is based no it's based on the plain language of the rule which says that there has to be acceptance by the chief clerk and necessarily the chief court cannot possibly accept a document outside of business hours so once he gets outside the business hours the computer under applies the plane's language of the rule just in the contained a disclaimer that justice government pointed out that said this is been uploaded to the commission it's been received by ass but it has not officially apply whatever it means this each document was was use the word received in a broader sense and you are was received at and on the date in question october second and was not filed until october third that is correct i'm going to proceed to electronically i'm confused about the order a new order a modified order it set a corrected copy of the same order that i did serve on august thirty first and it did the exact same date and that's because nothing in the order changed no party's substantive legal rights were affected by one bit there was not one change in any factual finding in any legal conclusion in any ordering paragraph all that was changed was three words deleted from a descriptive heading so that it would match the cover and the do you agree that we need to address that issue before we address the filing i think it's proper to address them in that all in the order you indicated just because what they're saying is this well look i told her to october three doesn't matter anyway but i want i also want to point out that's that's based also on the slate which is the statute and then the case law by statute the same appoints the same statute that my opponent cite section ten dash one thirteen a new work would require notice and a hearing to the public utility affected illinois bout my client did not notice or hearing and no one would suggest that there should have been first of the for that kind of a typographical correction it didn't affect any party's legal rights and  if my opponents were right moreover this court has held that non substantive changes to an order after a rehearing do not create a new or new order and they do not start a new rehearing cycle if as my opponents contend any change however trivial it was a new order would have to start the whole cycle all over again and the court order would then when the court could never reach the result it did in those cases like harrisonville telephone or continental air transport mr metropolis i would i would like to go back to two hundred point and for you for a moment certainly i thought your argument was going to be that the filing of an electronic document is affective upon acceptance of the complete document in the national language document must be received accepted by the chief for purposes of meeting the filing deadline that i work for i think implicit in your argument was that it really doesn't matter whether that happens because of it's filed at four fifty nine in the clerk's gone home it meets the requirements of this filed at five or one of the clerk is there it doesn't meet the requirements well we know but first off the hypothetical that you mention isn't presented by this case because it was clearly filed after business hours i'm still putting that aside you know i think that since the rule requires the chief clerk to be there at five pm and to be conducting his duties his or her duties then you know if a document is deem is is received done time is deemed to be accepted on time unless the come unless the clerk find some kind of problem with it i think that's just a function of the rule requires the commission's clerk to be there so we have to assume that they can that they will accept the document as long as it's good but but if they're not there they're not on business hours they can't accept it at least if they're not they're going business hours and they don't do anything under your argument is that still there's still meet the requirements because the computer will indicate that it was time that would be a separate case somebody should be in the clerk's office either the chief hurt herself or some you know one of their personnel that would assist them in you know be there doesn't a person to carry out or they have to do anything they would you know well in practice they do do some do things as we found you know one when i files documents at the commission i get calls within minutes from the clerk's office if they have any kind of question or problem with the finally did you mean to really file that will you know that that confidential think that  document is part of the public record or did you you know did you know that the sphere for cation page wasn't there so i mean that's another benefit for filing during business hours and that's why the commission encourages it with the rule if the commission's clerk is there to help you but you according to your position i think you said earlier please correct it if you found it seven thirty am if it's not a problem if i found it on the due date that would be correct yes be on the due date and so would still be good it's when you get in after business hours and acceptance can occur until the following that is except in separately noted and these tackles from file exceptions as indicated by both the chief court's official log docket sheet which says the finally occurred on october three and it is indicated by the commission's order on rehearing which states the finally occurred october three and just a better talking about when this is generally when usually like a time lag during business hours if i file something at say three thirty and then the clerk's office will call these is where the second there's a problem with that filing i may have to withdraw the filing a mirror image in they'll do that and then the date then we'll see the time for those we have no record of it actually having occurred in any particular instance but under the plain language of the rule reviewing acceptance by the chief clerk is a prerequisite to a tour of a filing becoming affective it's the plain language of the rule that we're that we're rusting on and the fact that there aren't reported cases tells you that attorneys would like me and like my opponent are very careful about deadlines when they're statutory and jurisdictional the receipt also says that you have is not officially filed your notice that you're not it's not officially filed until the commerce commission reviews for compliance commission rules and accepted by the commission personnel that's correct just because you press a button on your guarantee that it will be accepted the commission's rules clearly distinguish between review receipt and acceptance as justice thomas pointed out at the beginning during my opponent's argument if these calls were seat en except it is two different thing or it's clear the e u docket says that the people's application for a hearing was accepted at twelve am on october third and is justice freeman pointed out there's no way the clerk was there at twelve am looking at the people's documents what that date and time stamp mean it's generated automatically by the computer the commission's reference to that date on its order which ruled on the people's application as timely filed has no jurisdictional significance first of all the commission was unaware that there would be any dispute that the people's application was timely filed so it never had the opportunity to interpret its own regulations but its interpretation but that silence even below no absolutely not the commission did not make any determination that the people's application was filed untimely on october third what the commission's order does is it addresses the rehearing on the merits is to allow the public to see what's been happening at the commission it would be unfair to say that after the fact the people's application for hearing was untimely filed when that was never in front of the commission or we then precluded from deciding the question because the commerce commission hasn't had an opportunity to interpret its own absolutely not your honor  as i said it's an issue of regulatory interpretation this court could look at the regulation and if it said on its face that electronic filing after five pm is given the next business day filing date then i think eighteen t would have a case but the commission's rules don't say that and the commission has never interpreted its rules as having such a deadline we saw one instance in the entire e file and where the commission considered an application for rehearing filed at five fifty eight pm to be untimely but in struck the application for a hearing the party immediately moved for an emergency motion to reinstate the application for a hearing citing as reasons all of the reasons why i tried it filing should be given the same protections as mail filings under illinois law and under the commission's rules and the commission changed its mind two thousand and one seven years ago and the parties have been filing electronically after five ever since then and the commission has never that this about a five pm deadline be given to outright filings and that is consistent with illinois law in the electronic commerce security act the general assembly said you cannot disadvantage electronic filing over paper filing and yet in this case the people's application for a hearing which was instantaneously received by the commission and all the parties at five thirty four pm is is deemed jurisdictionally incomplete and not filed while it could well it protects if the people had gone to paper link cannot stand and i'd also point this court to the commission's rules that say these rules cannot be interpreted to abrogate any rights of the parties protected under the law  the people have a right to appeal the commission's decision which addressed a very important consumer issue of whether it's telecommunications services for the entire chicago followed by the k is there anything in the statutory basis for the deadline that would give the commission who were he to impose the acceptance if it's actually something different than just the filing of the document no your honor certainly in section ten thirteen a all that is required is that the parties within thirty days apply for a hearing that's heads there's nothing about complete documents there's nothing about acceptance there's nothing about being affective it's applied within thirty days and you've protected your appellate rights your honour's the people have done that in this case and it makes no sense to say for people filings that aren't even complete that it received days after the thirtieth day runs that those are timely filed and yet the people's submitted the day that it was due using the october second date on was untimely filed eighteen could have moved to strike the people's application for a hearing if it believed it was untimely it didn't do so and the commission therefore never had the opportunity to have any sort of say or make any sort of finding as to what its regulations and what the law provides the people's filing date should be and your honor my final point is that eighteen t makes much ado i don't think it's necessary your honor i think the commission's position is plain if they certainly if they disagree with the squire's take have the power to amend their regulations to provide a five pm deadline they don't have that and they've never interpreted the regulations as having that but if that was if that was what they wanted to date they would be free to do that i point out that there are some islands in this case does  people are appealing the commission's decision in favor of eighteen and t so the commission and eighteen t are aligned and the commission has as much interest in having its underlying order a the commission ruled on the people's application as timely filed the appellate court erred in dismissing it on either basis either that it was timely filed because it was filed before eleven fifty nine pm on date or because it was clearly filed within thirty days of the corrected order asked that remain and should this case reversed be to the first district because that's the only court that has jurisdiction over the people's appeal at this case number one zero five one three one be taken under