Establishing secure connection…Loading editor…Preparing document…

Groves v. State Civil Action No. 909 CV 412 GLS

This template is fully customizable. Edit the text, fill out the fields, and send it for signature. Give it a try!

AGREED ORDER OR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COUNTY,
NO.
PLAINTIFF
VS.
DEFENDANTS

THIS DAY there came on for hearing the motion of to dismiss the above styled civil action with prejudice. The Court, being fully advised in the premises and having been informed that the parties have reached a full and complete settlement of all claims herein, finds that the motion is well taken and should be granted.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the above styled civil action is dismissed with prejudice.

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED, this the day of ,

CIRCUIT JUDGE

AGREED TO AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Enter text

What Groves v. State Civil Action No. 909 CV 412 GLS refers to

Groves v. State Civil Action No. 909 CV 412 GLS is a named civil case caption used to identify a specific court action in state trial court records. This page explains the typical documents and procedural steps associated with that civil action number, including pleadings, service of process, case event deadlines, and notarization or signature requirements for filings and affidavits.

Why understanding the document flow matters

Clear guidance reduces filing errors, supports timely service, and helps ensure signatures, notarizations, and attachments meet court and statutory requirements such as ESIGN and state rules governing filings.

Why understanding the document flow matters

Who interacts with filings in Groves v. State Civil Action No. 909 CV 412 GLS

Identifying responsible parties early reduces distribution errors and supports correct chain-of-custody for signed or notarized records.

  • Plaintiff counsel or pro se plaintiff responsible for initial complaint, service, and proof of service.
  • Defense counsel or respondent tasked with filing responsive pleadings and motions in compliance with local rules.
  • Court clerks and judicial staff who accept filings, docket entries, and issue scheduling orders.

Common signatories and their roles

Attorney of Record

An attorney who signs filings, certifies service, and files exhibits on behalf of their client. Their signature certifies compliance with procedural rules and accuracy of representations to the court.

Affiant / Witness

A party or third-party who signs affidavits, declarations, or proof-of-service forms under penalty of perjury. Accurate identification and notarization or electronic notarization (when permitted) are required for evidentiary effect.

Core information fields required in filings

Case Caption: Exact case title
Docket Number: Civil action number
Party Names: Plaintiff and defendant
Document Title: Complaint, motion, etc.
Signature Block: Signer name and date
Service Information: Method and date

Sequential steps to prepare and file a typical pleading

Follow a standard sequence: prepare the document, confirm case caption and docket number, gather supporting exhibits, obtain signatures and notarizations if required, complete proof of service, and submit to the clerk following local e-filing rules.

  • 01
    Draft: Prepare pleading text and exhibits
  • 02
    Review: Confirm caption, dates, and parties
  • 03
    Sign: Obtain signature and notarization if required
  • 04
    File: Submit via court e-file or clerk’s office

Typical electronic filing and signature flow

E-filing and e-signature workflows follow predictable stages from document prep to final docketing; authentication and retention are key compliance points under ESIGN and state rules.

  • Upload: Add the final PDF and exhibits to the e-filing portal
  • Place Fields: Insert signature, date, and checkbox fields as needed
  • Authenticate: Use required signer authentication and consent disclosures
  • Docket: Court clerk accepts and assigns docket entry

Configuring a secure e-signature workflow for court filings

Set up a workflow that meets court and statutory requirements, including signer authentication, audit trail capture, and record retention.

Field Configuration
Signature Type Certified audit trail + visual signature image
Authentication Email link plus SMS or KBA where required
Retention Export signed PDF + audit report in secure storage
Notarization RON or in-person as jurisdiction requires

Technical considerations for eSubmission and e-signing

Confirm the platform supports ESIGN, UETA compliance, and any additional state or court authentication expectations before relying on it for filings.

  • Encryption: TLS 1.2/1.3 in transit; AES-256 at rest
  • Audit Trail: Detailed timestamps, IP, and action log
  • Integrations: Works with court e-file exports and cloud storage

Common timeframes and filing deadlines to track

Monitor statutory and court-ordered deadlines carefully; missing response deadlines or filing windows can result in default or dismissal.

Service Deadline:

Varies by local rule; typically 30–90 days for initial service

Responsive Pleading:

Usually 20–30 days after service depending on forum

Motions:

Check local rules for filing windows and hearing notice requirements

E-File Timing:

Court portals may close overnight; file before system cutoff times

Appeal Period:

State-specific; commonly 30 days from final judgment

Key case milestones from filing to judgment

Track the principal milestones so parties meet service, pleading, motion, and judgment-related deadlines throughout the case lifecycle.

01

Initial Filing

Complaint filed and docketed with the clerk

02

Service of Process

Plaintiff serves defendant per local rules

03

Answer or Response

Defendant files responsive pleading or motion

04

Discovery and Motions

Parties exchange information and resolve disputes

Common mistakes that delay court processing

  • Incorrect case caption or wrong docket number causing misfiling or clerk rejection
  • Missing or improperly executed proof of service that fails to prove delivery to opposing party
  • Unsigned or undated signature blocks or initials that the clerk deems noncompliant
  • Using e-signature without required consumer disclosures or authentication for court filings

Consequences of filing errors or improper signatures

Rejection: Clerk rejection
Default: Default judgment risk
Sanctions: Court sanctions or fees
Evidentiary Exclusion: Affidavits excluded
Notary Penalty: State penalties for improper notarization
Privileged Breach: Confidentiality loss if improper sharing

How electronic signatures compare to traditional signatures in court filings

Courts accept electronic signatures when they meet ESIGN and applicable state standards; some filings still require notarized or original wet signatures depending on jurisdiction.

Criteria Electronic Signature Wet Signature
Legal Validity esign/ueta compliant classic common law
Authentication email/sms/kba possible id check in person
Notarization ron where allowed traditional notary
Court Acceptance often accepted universally accepted

Representative eSignature pricing and feature comparison

Basic pricing and essential capability differences among common eSignature providers, with signNow listed first for consistency in vendor comparisons.

signNow DocuSign Adobe Sign PandaDoc HelloSign
Starting Price $8/user/mo $15/user/mo $14/user/mo $19/user/mo $15/user/mo
Free Trial 7-day free trial Varies by plan Varies by plan Varies by plan Varies by plan
Bulk Send Yes Yes Yes Yes No
Audit Trail Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
HIPAA Compliant Yes Yes Yes No No
Envelope Cap No cap 100 envelopes/user/year Varies by plan Varies by plan Varies by plan

Representative scenarios where accurate filings matter

These examples illustrate consequences when filings and signatures are handled properly versus when errors occur.

Case Example 1

A plaintiff filed exhibits without correct captioning which delayed docketing by weeks

  • Clerk returned the filing for correction
  • Accurate captioning and using validated e-filing templates prevented further delay and preserved hearing dates.

Case Example 2

A declaration was signed electronically without required consent disclosure

  • Opposing counsel challenged authenticity
  • Adding explicit ESIGN consent language and stronger signer authentication resolved admissibility issues and avoided exclusion.

Frequently asked questions for Groves v. State Civil Action No. 909 CV 412 GLS filings

Answers cover signature validity, notarization options, protest steps for rejected filings, and how to preserve evidentiary records when using e-signature platforms.


Need help? Contact support

be ready to get more
Join over 28 million airSlate SignNow users