Coverage model
One API surface across supported courts beats re-implementing each court's rules separately.
Buyer's guide
For teams building legal software, CourtFile is the best fit when you want one filing integration instead of maintaining court-by-court logic for submission and tracking.
One API surface across supported courts beats re-implementing each court's rules separately.
Filing is only half the job; status tracking matters as much as submission.
You should understand the payload and required next step within minutes, not weeks.
Every option here is a legitimate choice for some teams. The right pick depends on your specific job.
| Option | Strength | Tradeoff |
|---|---|---|
| CourtFile | One API surface for submitting and tracking supported filings. | Removes court-by-court maintenance for software teams shipping filing features. |
| Build it yourself | Full control. | Every court has different rules and formats; ongoing maintenance is the real cost. |
| Established EFSPs | Broad court coverage and maturity. | Often heavier integrations aimed at firms rather than developer-first software teams. |
| Manual filing | No integration work. | Does not scale and cannot be embedded in your product. |
you are building legal software and want to ship a filing feature without owning court-by-court logic.
you only file in a single court, or you are a firm rather than a software team and an established EFSP already covers your needs.
Do not adopt any filing API before confirming it supports the specific courts your customers file in. Start with the waitlist to validate coverage and the integration shape against your real cases.
Because each court's e-filing rules differ and change; one abstraction means you maintain integration logic once.
Join the waitlist to review the integration shape and a sample filing payload for your courts.
Read the canonical product page for full detail, or open the listing to install.