Class Action Accuses Judiciary of Overbilling for PACER Records Access | National Law Journal

The federal judiciary has long faced criticism for charging fees for online access to public court records. A new class action claims a computer error caused the system to overcharge users. The Public Access to Court Electronic Records, or PACER, system charges 10 cents per page to view documents. The system’s users—lawyers, litigants, reporters (The National Law Journal uses PACER) and the public—also pay 10 cents per page to view case dockets that list the documents and other case information. The system uses a formula based on the amount of data in the docket to calculate the equivalent number of pages. Plaintiff Bryndon Fisher, a Washington state resident represented by lawyers from Terrell Marshall Law Group in Seattle and Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe in San Francisco, claims that a computer error causes the system to overcount certain information in the docket—specifically, the section of the page that lists the name and number of the case, the parties, and the lawyers involved. By overcounting that information, Fisher says, the system adds at least one additional 10-cent charge. Those extra dimes can add up, according to Fisher, who claimed that over the past two years he’s paid $37 in overcharges. A spokesman for the federal judiciary declined to comment on Monday. Noah Schubert of Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe said in an interview that they hired “experts with advanced degrees in computer science” to analyze PACER’s billing system after hearing reports of overcharging. Those experts created models that showed that the system was incorrectly billing users, he said. “The statutes indicate that they’re only allowed to charge what is reasonably necessary to the public and so while there’s certainly a lot of debate about whether there should be charges to the public for using the system in the first place, we believe at the very least they should charge what they say they charge,” Schubert said. In two largely identical lawsuits filed on Dec. 28 and 29 in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, Fisher said he pulled up 184 case docket reports over the past two years and paid $109.40 for that access. He claims that if the judiciary had properly calculated the data in those reports, he should have only owed $72.40.

Source: Class Action Accuses Judiciary of Overbilling for PACER Records Access | National Law Journal

Advertisements

Author: Stephen G. Barr, Group Publisher

Author, Syndicated Columnist, Editor In-Chief and Group Publisher at SGB Media Group, a social media marketing firm specializing in digital media content production, publishing, affiliate marketing, public relations and advertising. Over 25 years experience in retailing, advertising, website & online forum development, niche social networking, affiliate marketing, search optimization, branding and identity, site location, non-profit fund raising. Event planning, promotion, production and MC/Host at public events. Author, Editor & Publisher of 35 syndicated, digital publications utilizing multiple digital distribution channels in conjunction with launching and administrating national advertising campaigns for major Fortune 500 advertisers in partnership with Google, Ning, Facebook, Myspace, Yahoo, DoubleClick, LinkShare, PepperJam and other industry leading third party affiliate networks. Product development team member from conception to launch on many websites, tangible goods and organizational structure for start ups. Specialties: Public relations, retailing, advertising, website & online forum development, niche social networking, blogging, email campaigns, affiliate/performance marketing, search optimization, branding and identity, site location, event production & promotion, non-profit fund raising and tasteful, responsible adult content publishing. An internationally recognized and read social media columnist & pundit on The Examiner, Associate Content, Vator.tv, X-Biz.net and Technorati and his own affiliated sites.