'Quiet. Mom's in Court': Akerman Miami Partner Describes Taking Part in Historic High Court Virtual Hearing
Chief Justice Charles Canady has made a push to restore more court operations during the COVID-19 pandemic and is exploring long-term remote court concepts as part of a task force he created.
May 19, 2020 at 01:47 PM
4 minute read
When Marcy Levine Aldrich appeared before the Florida Supreme Court, she had a sign on the door of her home office that says, "Quiet. Mom's in court."
It was a message directing her husband and children—one in high school and another in college—not to interrupt. 'It is a very different thing to have no separation from your work life … [and] your home life," Aldrich said.
On May 6, Aldrich, a partner at Akerman in Miami and chair of the firm's class action defense practice, appeared before the Florida Supreme Court during a historic moment when the court heard oral arguments via video for the first time.
Chief Justice Charles Canady has made a push to restore more court operations during the COVID-19 pandemic and is exploring long-term remote court concepts as part of a task force he created.
Aldrich got to participate in closely watched proceedings.
|'Will my internet work?'
The process started in April when the Florida Supreme Court sent a notice to alert Aldrich that her oral argument in the case, MRI Assocs. of Tampa v. State Farm, would take place over Zoom.
A couple of weeks later, the Florida Supreme Court helped Aldrich and the other attorneys in setting up their technology to speak before the court, which included the options of two backgrounds: a blank wall or courtroom background, which Aldrich later learned was a counsel table at the court. A drone went in the air to photograph the table.
"Instead of being seated at the counsel table, we were sort of hovering over them," Aldrich said.
Moments before she was called before the Florida Supreme Court, a couple of "oh no" scenarios went through Aldrich's mind. The thoughts were drastically different from a typical Florida Supreme Court oral argument.
"In a normal appellant argument, if I have any concerns about preparation, it is purely substantive," Aldrich said. "But for this, I now have another area of new anxieties. Will my internet work? Will my electricity stay on? Will my neighbor decide to mow their lawn right outside my window?"
While it was not what Aldrich expected when she was initially told the proceeding would take place before the court, as a whole, the process went smoothly for both her and the Florida Supreme Court.
Since the May proceedings, the state high court has made a tentative June argument calendar with 11 cases on the docket due to the success from that first day of a virtual hearing. Aldrich says the Florida Supreme Court realized when there are scenarios like the coronavirus pandemic, the evolution of virtual court hearings can keep the "wheels of justice grinding." She also finds video preferable to telephonic hearings and welcomes the changes.
"As a litigator in Florida, not many people get that many cases that make it up to the Florida Supreme Court, and there is something very special about doing it there," Aldrich said. "Historically, people didn't want telephone hearings. There is something definitely more effective to be seen, as opposed to being a disembodied voice on the telephone."
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Families Settle Court Battle Over Who Owns Parkland Killer's Name, Likeness
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Read the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome': DOJ Proposes Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
- 2Voir Dire Voyeur: I Find Out What Kind of Juror I’d Be
- 3When It Comes to Local Law 97 Compliance, You’ve Gotta Have (Good) Faith
- 4Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Virginia Griffith, Director of Business Development at OutsideGC
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Bill Tanenbaum, Partner & Chair, AI & Data Law Practice Group at Moses Singer
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250