An Act Regarding the Electronic Data and Court Records Filed in the Electronic Case Management System of the Supreme Judicial Court
Maine Legislature, Session 129, LD 1759
Committee: Judiciary
Sponsors: CARPENTER, BAILEY, KEIM, CARDONE, HARNETT, TALBOT ROSS
Amends: 4 MRSA §7, 4 MRSA §8-C, 4 MRSA §8-D

Legislative Document
No. 1759
S.P. 589
In Senate, May 21, 2019
An Act Regarding the Electronic Data and Court Records Filed in 
the Electronic Case Management System of the Supreme Judicial 
Court
Submitted by the Judicial Department pursuant to Joint Rule 204.
Reference to the Committee on Judiciary suggested and ordered printed.
DAREK M. GRANT
Secretary of the Senate
Presented by Senator CARPENTER of Aroostook.
Cosponsored by Representative BAILEY of Saco and
Senator: KEIM of Oxford, Representatives: CARDONE of Bangor, DeVEAU of Caribou, 
HARNETT of Gardiner, TALBOT ROSS of Portland.
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:
Sec. 1.  4 MRSA §7 is amended to read:
§7.  General jurisdiction; control of records
The Supreme Judicial Court may exercise its jurisdiction according to the common 
law not inconsistent with the Constitution or any statute, and may punish contempts 
against its authority by fine and imprisonment, or either, and administer oaths. It has 
general superintendence of all inferior courts for the prevention and correction of errors 
and abuses where the law does not expressly provide a remedy and has control of all 
records and documents in the custody of its clerks whether physical or electronic, 
including those stored in an electronic case management system. Whenever justice or the 
public good requires, it may order the expunging from the records and papers on file in 
any case which has gone to judgment of any name or other part thereof unnecessary to the 
purpose and effect of said judgment. It may issue all writs and processes, not within the 
exclusive jurisdiction of the Superior Court, necessary for the furtherance of justice or the 
execution of the laws in the name of the State under the seal of said court, attested by any 
justice not a party or interested in the suit and signed by the clerk. 
Sec. 2.  4 MRSA §8-C, as enacted by PL 2015, c. 78, §1, is amended to read:
§8-C.  Rules concerning electronic court records
1.  Rules and orders; processes and procedures.  Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, the Supreme Judicial Court may adopt rules and issue orders to permit 
or require the use of electronic forms, filings, records, documents, e-mail and electronic 
signatures whenever paper forms, filings, records, written notice, postal mail and written 
signatures are required for judicial, legal or any other court-related process under the 
Maine Revised Statutes.
The Supreme Judicial Court, by rule, may determine any other processes or procedures 
appropriate to ensure adequate preservation, disposition, integrity, security, appropriate 
accessibility and confidentiality of the electronic court documents, data and court records 
described in this section and section 8-D.
2.  Electronic signatures.  An electronic signature may be accepted as a substitute 
for and, if accepted, has the same force and effect as the use of a manual signature.  The 
Supreme Judicial Court shall determine the type of electronic signature required, the 
manner and format in which the signature is affixed to the electronic record and the 
criteria that must be met by a party, including attorneys, filing a document.
Sec. 3.  4 MRSA §8-D is enacted to read:
§8-D.  Rules concerning electronic case management system
1.  Rulemaking for electronic case management system.  The Supreme Judicial 
Court shall develop and adopt rules addressing any systems or procedures appropriate to 
ensure adequate preservation, disposition, integrity, security, accessibility and 
confidentiality of electronic data and court records filed with or generated by the state 
courts and stored in an electronic case management system.  In developing the rules, the 
Supreme Judicial Court shall ensure that the tradition of open courts and public access to 
court records is preserved by making available those court records that advance the 
public's interest in the administration of justice while maintaining the protection of 
private, personal or confidential information, data and documents.
2.  General policies regarding access to electronic court records.  The following 
provisions apply regarding access to electronic court records.
A.  Access to electronic court records by the public is the presumption.  Electronic 
court records that are not designated confidential, private, closed, sealed or otherwise 
not public records by state or federal statute or by court rule or order must be publicly 
accessible except as otherwise provided in this subsection. The presumption that 
electronic court records are public does not preclude the imposition of reasonable 
fees for access to records.
B.  All parties to a case, and the attorneys for those parties, must have access to the 
electronic court records for that case, whether or not those records are publicly 
accessible, unless otherwise specifically ordered.
C.  When an entire case type is closed to the public by statute, the electronic court 
records of a case of that case type are not publicly accessible.  For case types that are 
generally open to the public, specific documents, data and information from those 
case types may be closed to the public by state or federal statute or by court rule or 
order.
D.  Documents, data and information that are designated confidential, private, closed, 
sealed or otherwise not public by state or federal statute or by court rule or order that 
are contained in electronic court records are not publicly accessible.
SUMMARY
This bill requires the Supreme Judicial Court to develop and adopt rules regarding 
court records and documents retained by the courts in an electronic case management 
system. The rules must reflect the presumption that court records are open to the public 
except in certain circumstances when necessary to protect private, personal or 
confidential information, data and documents or when designated confidential by state or 
federal statute or by court rule or order.  The presumption that court records are public 
does not preclude the imposition of reasonable fees for access to those records.