Developer docs
API playgroundTry for free, no card

Search company profiles

Court Administrators Office

Full company profile

uuid0047bmj

Namestring
Court Administrators Office
Legal namestring
State Court Administrative Office, Michigan Supreme Court
Websiteurl
courts.mi.gov
Company typeenum
Public
Founded yearint
1835
Operating statusenum
Operating
Ownership categoryenum
Headcount rangeband
11–50
akta.pro rankint
Markets served

Serves global market

Keyword5 values
judicial administration, court case filing, legal dispute resolution, court administration services, judicial branch oversight
Industry3 codes
1Judicial Courts & Court Administration
CodeBPAIAFAAPrimaryYes
2State/Provincial Courts & Judicial Administration
CodeBPAIABAEPrimaryNo
3Court Services & Operations (Clerks, Records, Jury, Interpreters)
CodeBPAIAFAHPrimaryNo
NAICS code2 codes
  • Courts92211
  • Public Administration92
SIC code1 code
  • Services-Legal Services8111
Product category
Judicial Administration
Social media profiles1 record
Cost components4 values
Personnel, Operations, Infrastructure, Technology or R&D
GTM typeB2C
B2C
Offering typeServices
Services
Core offering1 text field

The State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) provides administrative support and oversight to all Michigan courts under the Michigan Supreme Court. It administers court case filing, legal proceedings, and judicial administration across the state as a constitutional office of the Michigan judicial branch.

Differentiator
Functional benefit
Problem solved
Recent move3 records

Each record includes

Date, Type, Title, Description, Source

Peers8 records
1Pennsylvania Unified Judicial System
TypeBroad incumbent
Description

Mid-Atlantic state court administrative authority; comparable to Michigan SCAO in providing technology, training, and case-management support across multiple trial-court tiers.

TypeBroad incumbent
Description

Statewide court administration organization serving a comparable populous U.S. state; peers with Michigan SCAO on operating model, appellate structure, and trial-level oversight responsibilities.

TypeBroad incumbent
Description

Florida's centralized court administration office; structurally and functionally equivalent to Michigan SCAO, including statewide policy implementation and trial-court support.

TypeBroad incumbent
Description

Constitutional state court administrator for Texas; offers the same administrative-support, court-oversight, and case-management mandate as Michigan SCAO, at similar scale per state population.

TypeOthers
Description

Non-profit advisory and technology services provider to state courts nationwide; relevant as a vendor/partner counterpart to state-level offices like Michigan SCAO rather than a direct operator, but operates in the same court-administration domain.

TypeRegional player
Description

Federal/state hybrid agency providing court supervision and related administrative functions for the District of Columbia; relevant precedent for combining court administrative duties with offender/supervision services in a single agency.

TypeBroad incumbent
Description

Largest U.S. state judicial branch; directly comparable to Michigan SCAO as a constitutionally established statewide court administrator handling filings, records, and court operations for tens of millions of residents.

TypeBroad incumbent
Description

Federal analog providing administrative support to U.S. federal courts; comparable role (centralized administrative office for a multi-tier court system) though operating in federal rather than state jurisdiction.

Market position
Strengths3 records

Each record includes

Headline, Details, Source

Weaknesses4 records

Each record includes

Headline, Details, Source

Competitive moat2 records

Each record includes

Type, Details

Key risks5 records

Each record includes

Headline, Details, Source

Key highlights5 records

Each record includes

Headline, Details, Source

Customer concentration

Classification, Details

Segment1 record

Each record includes

Title, Type, Primary, Description, Pain point addressed, Use case, Source

Ideal customer profile1 record

Each record includes

Profile, Firmographic size, Sales motion, Sales cycle length, Buying structure, Purchase trigger, Buyer persona, Geography, Industry vertical, Primary use case, Description, Pain points, Evidence proof points, Target buyer

Technology focused
No
API detail
Has APIbool
No

Docs URL, Description

AI maturity
App detail

Has app

Core technology
Revenue estimate
Valuation estimate
Number of profiles
No data
No data
Funding overview

Funding stage, Last funding date, Total funding USD

Funding rounds

Each record includes

Round, Amount USD, Date, Pre money valuation, Total investors, Investors, News

Investors

Each record includes

Name, Type, Date of entry, Rounds participated, Website

Funding detail is available on the Subscription and Enterprise plan.Contact sales →

M&A

Each record includes

Name, Acquisition type, Announced date, Completed date, Status, Website, News

Investment

Each record includes

Name, Round, Announced date, Lead investor, Website, News

M&A and investment is available on the Subscription and Enterprise plan.Contact sales →

Court Administrators Office

Judicial Administrationcourts.mi.gov

Court Administrators Office firmographics

Firmographics
Name
Court Administrators Office
Legal name
State Court Administrative Office, Michigan Supreme Court
Website
https://courts.mi.gov
Company type
Public
Founded year
1835
Operating status
Operating
Headcount range
11–50 employees
Ownership category
akta.pro rank

Court Administrators Office industry classification

Industry
Product category
Judicial Administration
NAICS
Courts (92211), Public Administration (92)
SIC
Services-Legal Services (8111)
akta.pro primary industry
Judicial Courts & Court Administration (BPAIAFAA)
akta.pro secondary industries
State/Provincial Courts & Judicial Administration (BPAIABAE), Court Services & Operations (Clerks, Records, Jury, Interpreters) (BPAIAFAH)

Keywords

  • Judicial administration
  • Court case filing
  • Legal dispute resolution
  • Court administration services
  • Judicial branch oversight

Court Administrators Office business model

Business model
GTM type
B2C
Offering type
Services
Cost components
Personnel, Operations, Infrastructure, Technology or R&D

Court Administrators Office product offering

Product offering

Core offering

The State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) provides administrative support and oversight to all Michigan courts under the Michigan Supreme Court. It administers court case filing, legal proceedings, and judicial administration across the state as a constitutional office of the Michigan judicial branch.

Differentiator

Problem solved

Functional benefit

Companies that use Court Administrators Office

Customer profile

Segments1 record

Ideal customer profiles1 record

Court Administrators Office technology and API

Technology

Technology focussed No

API detail

Has API
No
API docs
API detail

Core technology

AI maturity

App detail

Court Administrators Office partnerships and signals

Strategic signal

Recent moves3 records

Court Administrators Office competitors and assessment

Company assessment

Broad incumbents

  • Pennsylvania Unified Judicial System: Mid-Atlantic state court administrative authority; comparable to Michigan SCAO in providing technology, training, and case-management support across multiple trial-court tiers.
  • New York State Unified Court System: Statewide court administration organization serving a comparable populous U.S. state; peers with Michigan SCAO on operating model, appellate structure, and trial-level oversight responsibilities.
  • Florida State Courts System: Florida's centralized court administration office; structurally and functionally equivalent to Michigan SCAO, including statewide policy implementation and trial-court support.
  • Texas Judicial Branch: Constitutional state court administrator for Texas; offers the same administrative-support, court-oversight, and case-management mandate as Michigan SCAO, at similar scale per state population.
  • California Courts (Judicial Branch of California): Largest U.S. state judicial branch; directly comparable to Michigan SCAO as a constitutionally established statewide court administrator handling filings, records, and court operations for tens of millions of residents.
  • Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts: Federal analog providing administrative support to U.S. federal courts; comparable role (centralized administrative office for a multi-tier court system) though operating in federal rather than state jurisdiction.

Others

  • National Center for State Courts (NCSC): Non-profit advisory and technology services provider to state courts nationwide; relevant as a vendor/partner counterpart to state-level offices like Michigan SCAO rather than a direct operator, but operates in the same court-administration domain.

Regional players

  • Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA, DC): Federal/state hybrid agency providing court supervision and related administrative functions for the District of Columbia; relevant precedent for combining court administrative duties with offender/supervision services in a single agency.

Market position

Strengths3 records

Weaknesses4 records

Competitive moat2 records

Key risks5 records

Key highlights5 records

Customer concentration

Court Administrators Office social profiles

Digital presence

Court Administrators Office financial estimates

Financial estimate

Revenue estimate

Valuation estimate

Court Administrators Office leadership team

Management profile

Number of profiles

Court Administrators Office funding detail

Funding detail

Funding overview

Funding rounds

Investors

Funding detail is available on the Subscription and Enterprise plan.Contact sales →

Court Administrators Office M&A and investment

M&A and investment

M&A

Investments

M&A and investment is available on the Subscription and Enterprise plan.Contact sales →

Frequently asked questions about Court Administrators Office

What does Court Administrators Office do?

The State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) provides administrative support and oversight to all Michigan courts under the Michigan Supreme Court. It administers court case filing, legal proceedings, and judicial administration across the state as a constitutional office of the Michigan judicial branch.

Is Court Administrators Office a public or private company?

Court Administrators Office is a public company. It is classified as state government owned and is currently operating.

When was Court Administrators Office founded?

Court Administrators Office was founded in 1835. It employs 11 to 50 people.

Who are Court Administrators Office's main competitors?

Broad incumbents on record are Pennsylvania Unified Judicial System, New York State Unified Court System, Florida State Courts System, Texas Judicial Branch, California Courts (Judicial Branch of California) and Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. National Center for State Courts (NCSC) is listed as an others. Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA, DC) is listed as a regional player.

Does Court Administrators Office have an API?

No public API is recorded for Court Administrators Office.

What industry is Court Administrators Office in?

Court Administrators Office's product category is Judicial Administration. Its primary akta.pro industry code is BPAIAFAA, Judicial Courts & Court Administration, with a secondary code of BPAIABAE, State/Provincial Courts & Judicial Administration. Its NAICS code is 92211 and its SIC code is 8111.

Unlock the full company data

50 free credits on sign-up, no credit card required.

Contact sales
Live signals
The IndependentMichigan AG reveals state’s final accountability step for Flint water crisisMichigan Attorney General Dana Nessel released a 101-page report on Tuesday detailing the state's criminal investigation into the Flint water crisis, calling it the final accountability step her office can take. The report covers the 2014 switch to Flint River water, delayed official response, and failed felony charges against nine people, including former Gov. Rick Snyder, which the state Supreme Court dismissed in 2022.PressdemocratMichigan AG releases Flint water crisis report, says final accountability step her office can takeMichigan Attorney General Dana Nessel released a 101-page report on Tuesday detailing the lead-water crisis in Flint, describing the criminal investigation that brought charges against former Gov. Rick Snyder and eight others. The state Supreme Court threw out those charges in 2022, and Nessel said the report is the final accountability step her office can take. Prosecutors said a summary report would follow in 2024.The Canadian Press NewsMichigan AG releases Flint water crisis report, says final accountability step her office can takeMichigan Attorney General Dana Nessel released a 101-page report on Tuesday detailing the lead-water crisis in Flint, describing the criminal investigation that brought charges against former Gov. Rick Snyder and eight others. The state Supreme Court threw out those charges in 2022, and Nessel said the report is the final accountability step her office can take.Bangor Daily NewsMichigan AG releases Flint water crisis report, says final accountability step her office can takeMichigan Attorney General Dana Nessel released a 101-page report on Tuesday detailing the lead-water crisis in Flint, describing the criminal investigation that brought charges against former Gov. Rick Snyder and eight others. The state Supreme Court threw out those charges in 2022, and Nessel said the report is the final accountability step her office can take.