.jpg)
ecf Declaration
Filing a petition involves about 14 signatures. Filing one document is MUCH
more efficient than scanning all the original signatures. After the
petition and related docs have been filed, it is more efficient to use
scanned signatures.
In addition, the EFD reminds counsel and parties of their duty to retain
originally signed documents for 5 years.
So: as part of the petition, keep it. Otherwise, not.
Gerald McNally
Gerald McNally
McNally & Associates, P.C.
316 E. Broadway, Suite B
Glendale, CA 91205-1011
818-507-4100, Fax 818-507-5001
www.geraldmcnally.com
Notice to Recipient: This email is meant for only the intended recipient of
the transmission and may be a communication privileged by law. If you
received this email in error, review, use, dissemination, distribution or
copying of this email is strictly prohibited. Please notify us immediately
of the error by return email and please delete this message and any and all
duplicates of this message. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
There is not one purpose served (that I can think of) for EFD. If a client
is able to sign the EFD, why is the client unable to sign the actual
document?
Sincerely,
*Michael Avanesian *
*[image: avanesian-law-logo-modern]*
801 N. Brand Blvd., Suite #1130
Glendale, CA 91203
Tel: (818) 276-2477 | Fax: (818) 208-4550
*Confidentiality**: *This electronic transmission and its contents are
legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the
use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply
to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.
*IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:* To ensure compliance with requirements
imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon,
for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code,
or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
transaction or matter addressed herein.
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Holly Roark hollyroark22@gmail.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> In Idaho, they do not require the electronic filing declaration, but they
> do require that certain documents have a scanned copy of the Debtor's or
> party's actual signature uploaded as a separate docket. For example, the
> entire petition will use the /s/Debtor Name, but then we upload the
> holographic signatures as a separate docket. So, there is actually both an
> electronic signature and holographic signatures.
>
> Oddly, not everything requires a holographic signature. For example, some
> parts of the petition require it, but as to the creditor matrix, that can
> be signed simply by /s/Debtor Name, with no proof of actual signature.
>
> Since I practice in both jurisdictions, I actually prefer not having the
> EFD and just scanning in the holographic signatures and filing them with
> the court. I scan them into my computer anyway after the signing, so it's
> not a huge deal to include them in the filing.
>
>
> Holly Roark
> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
> *and Sports Lawyer*
> holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
> www.roarklawoffices.com
> *Central District of California & District of Idaho* - Consumer
> Bankruptcy Attorney
> 1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
> T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
>
> *By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 5:43 PM, jhayes@hayesbklaw.com [cdcbaa] cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I am advised that there has been some discussion among the judges about
>> getting rid of the ecf Declaration form. The idea is that it seems to be
>> unnecessary.
>>
>>
>> I have been asked to inquire whether anyone has any thoughts on whether
>> we should keep it or scrap it. What is the downside to getting rid of it?
>> Now is the time to speak up.
>>
>>
>
>
There is not one purpose served (that I can think of) for EFD. If a client is able to sign the EFD, why is the client unable to sign the actual document?Sincerely,Michael Avanesian801 N. Brand Blvd., Suite #1130Glendale, CA 91203Tel: (818) 276-2477 | Fax: (818) 208-4550Confidentiality:This electronic transmission and its contents are legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
In Idaho, they do not require the electronic filing declaration, but they
do require that certain documents have a scanned copy of the Debtor's or
party's actual signature uploaded as a separate docket. For example, the
entire petition will use the /s/Debtor Name, but then we upload the
holographic signatures as a separate docket. So, there is actually both an
electronic signature and holographic signatures.
Oddly, not everything requires a holographic signature. For example, some
parts of the petition require it, but as to the creditor matrix, that can
be signed simply by /s/Debtor Name, with no proof of actual signature.
Since I practice in both jurisdictions, I actually prefer not having the
EFD and just scanning in the holographic signatures and filing them with
the court. I scan them into my computer anyway after the signing, so it's
not a huge deal to include them in the filing.
Holly Roark
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
*and Sports Lawyer*
holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
www.roarklawoffices.com
*Central District of California & District of Idaho* - Consumer Bankruptcy
Attorney
1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
*By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 5:43 PM, jhayes@hayesbklaw.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> I am advised that there has been some discussion among the judges about
> getting rid of the ecf Declaration form. The idea is that it seems to be
> unnecessary.
>
>
> I have been asked to inquire whether anyone has any thoughts on whether we
> should keep it or scrap it. What is the downside to getting rid of it?
> Now is the time to speak up.
>
>
>
In Idaho, they do not require the electronic filing declaration, but they do require that certain documents have a scanned copy of th
The post was migrated from Yahoo.