Since the passage of California’s SPARE Act (AB 747), One Legal has received hundreds of questions from legal professionals seeking to understand how the law will impact service of process beginning January 1, 2027.
To help answer those questions, we compiled some of the most common inquiries from our webinars, customer conversations, and industry discussions. This blog is part of a four-part series designed to provide practical guidance on the SPARE Act’s requirements and what legal professionals should be doing now to prepare.
In this installment, we focus on one of the most talked-about aspects of the SPARE Act: the new documentation requirements for service of process, including photographs, GPS coordinates, and proofs of service.
What does AB 747 require process servers to document?
Beginning January 1, 2027, AB 747 will require additional documentation to accompany service attempts and completed service in covered matters.
Under the new law, proofs of service will generally need to include:
- One or more photographs of each effected or attempted service
- Date and time information
- GPS coordinates or equivalent location data
- Additional information regarding service attempts and diligence efforts
These requirements are intended to provide greater transparency and accountability in the service process.
What does the process server need to photograph?
The photo requirement is focused on documenting the location of service, not the person being served.
The law generally requires a photograph of the site where service occurred or was attempted.
For service at a residence, the photograph should capture the door or entrance to the dwelling if the door itself is not reasonably accessible.
For service at a business, the photograph should capture the door or entrance to the office or business location if the door itself is not reasonably accessible.
Importantly, the statute does not require process servers to photograph the individual being served.
Are photographs required for unsuccessful service attempts?
Yes.
The photo requirement applies to both effected service and attempted service.
This means a process server must generally document each service attempt, not just successful service. The purpose is to create a record demonstrating that the attempt occurred at the claimed location and time.
Does the photograph need to include the person accepting service?
No.
The law focuses on documenting the location where service occurred, not the identity of the individual accepting documents.
Whether service is made directly on a defendant, a receptionist, an authorized agent, or another appropriate recipient, the photograph requirement remains tied to the location itself.
What if service occurs somewhere other than a home or business?
The photo requirement still applies.
However, when service occurs in a public place or another location that is neither a residence nor a business, the entranceway requirement does not apply.
In those situations, the process server would generally photograph the location (“…the site of each effected or attempted service…”) where service occurred. Examples may include:
- A sidewalk
- A parking lot
- A park
- A beach
- Another public location
The photograph is intended to document the site of service and connect it to a specific time and place.
What are GPS coordinates, and why are they required?
The law refers to “GPS or equivalent coordinates,” which generally means location data identifying where a service attempt occurred.
Most modern smartphones automatically capture location information when photographs are taken. This data is commonly stored as part of the photo’s metadata.
Under AB 747, location information becomes part of the broader effort to verify where service, or attempts at service, occurred and support the accuracy of the proof of service.
Does the law require both photographs and GPS coordinates?
Yes.
The statute contemplates photographs that include date, time, and GPS information. These elements work together to document when and where service occurred.
What does the statute mean by a “readable stamp”?
The law requires photographs to contain a “readable stamp” that automatically records the date, time, and GPS coordinates (or equivalent location information).
Additional guidance may be provided before implementation, but many legal professionals expect this requirement to mean that the information must be visible on or associated with the photograph itself rather than existing solely in the photo’s underlying metadata.
As revised Judicial Council forms and implementation guidance continue to develop, additional clarification may become available.
Is photo metadata alone enough to satisfy the requirement?
That remains an open question.
The statute clearly requires photographs with a readable date, time, and GPS stamp, but it does not expressly address whether embedded metadata alone would satisfy the requirement.
This is one area where additional Judicial Council guidance may be helpful before the law takes effect.
Will the date and time need to appear on the photograph?
Possibly.
Because the statute references a readable stamp containing this information, many practitioners are preparing for workflows that visibly associate the date, time, and GPS information with each photograph.
Future guidance may provide additional clarity regarding implementation.
What happens if there is no cell signal or GPS signal?
The law distinguishes between two different situations: the absence of a photograph and the absence of GPS information.
If GPS, mobile, or equivalent signal is unavailable at the time of service, the photograph must still generally be taken. However, the process server must provide a detailed written explanation describing why the location information could not be captured.
Lack of signal is not, by itself, a reason to omit the photograph.
When can a photograph be omitted?
The statute provides a safety exception.
If, in the reasonable judgment of the process server, taking a photograph would compromise the server’s safety, a photograph may be omitted. In that circumstance, the process server must provide a detailed written statement explaining the safety concern.
The law does not provide an exhaustive list of qualifying situations, and courts will likely evaluate these circumstances on a case-by-case basis.
Are body cameras required under AB 747?
No.
AB 747 does not require or specifically address body camera usage.
The law focuses on photographs, date and time information, GPS coordinates, and related proof-of-service documentation.
How do process servers capture this information?
Most smartphones already have the capability to capture photographs, location data, and timestamps.
Many process-serving professionals also use dedicated applications designed to streamline documentation, workflow management, and compliance requirements.
Will photographs need to be filed with the court?
Yes.
AB 747 provides that the proof of service must include the photographs documenting the service attempt or completed service.
The proposed revisions to Judicial Council proof of service forms likewise contemplate attaching photographs as part of the filing rather than retaining them separately for future challenges.
As implementation progresses, additional guidance regarding filing procedures may become available.
What should legal professionals be doing now?
Although the new requirements do not take effect until January 1, 2027, firms may benefit from reviewing their current service-of-process workflows now.
Key considerations include:
- How service documentation is collected
- Whether existing vendors can meet the new requirements
- How photographs and supporting evidence will be stored
- How proofs of service will be reviewed before filing
For many firms, AB 747 will require operational adjustments long before the effective date arrives.
Final thoughts
AB 747’s documentation requirements represent one of the most significant procedural changes included in the SPARE Act. By requiring photographs, location data, and additional supporting information, the law seeks to create more transparent and defensible service records.
While some implementation details are still being clarified, legal professionals should begin familiarizing themselves with these requirements now so they can evaluate workflows, vendors, and internal processes well ahead of 2027.
In our next article, we will examine another major component of the SPARE Act: the new reasonable diligence standard, substituted service requirements, and what legal professionals should know about service attempts under AB 747.
If you would like to learn more about the SPARE Act, watch One Legal’s on-demand webinar or explore the next article in our AB 747 blog series.
