South Florida Litigators Raise Concerns Over Courts' Long-Term Adoption of Zoom
Veteran trial lawyer Joel Hirschhorn is choosing to postpone three jury trials in the next year because he feels Zoom proceedings lose some of the elements of surprise and drama that can ensue during courtroom litigation.
May 26, 2020 at 03:08 PM
4 minute read
Some South Florida lawyers have a bone to pick with Zoom but also acknowledge its potential to facilitate litigation practice during and after the COVID-19 shutdown.
Joel Hirschhorn, a shareholder at GrayRobinson in Miami, for instance, said there is something about the "roar of the greasepaint and the smell of the crowd" that is lost by using Zoom to facilitate hearings and court testimony.
To make his point about losing the rush of emotions that come from being in the courtroom, Hirschhorn pointed to a federal court case where he was tactically cross-examining a witness.
The man "slammed his hand on the bar in front of the witness stand and said, 'You want to go outside and settle this man to man?' " Hirschhorn said. "Of course, everybody in the courtroom cracked up. The judge said in his southern accent, 'Mr. Hirschhorn, I believe you made your point. I don't think any further cross-examination is necessary.' You won't get those moments."
|Lost elements
Hirschhorn said those elements of surprise and the drama that can ensue are critical to courtroom litigation.
Zoom will hinder that, he said.
That is the reason the veteran trial lawyer, whose career has included landmark cases defending pornographers, drug kingpins and U.S. congressmen, is choosing to postpone three jury trials in the next year.
Christina Paul, a partner at K&L Gates in Miami, has had a smooth transition with the switch from in-person hearings to having remote, Zoom hearings. Yet, she finds some of the camaraderie is lost when she has cases before the Miami-Dade Circuit Court that are now conducted through Zoom.
"You come in and you see people that you practice with," Paul said. "You see people that you've gone to law school with and there's a connection that emanates out of that building. So sitting behind a desk at your home, you lose that sort of aura that you get when you walk into that building and the connection that you get with your fellow bar members."
Zoom technology has become essential in the coronavirus reality that has generated stay-at-home orders and strict social distancing rules. Before COVID-19, video calls were a novelty. Yet they have now become a necessity.
Stephen N. Zack, a partner at Boies Schiller Flexner in Miami, said lawyers are becoming more comfortable with Zoom. Before the coronavirus pandemic, Zack thought it did not make much sense to "go to a one-day hearing in Chicago from Miami."
"A day going, a day coming, and sitting around waiting for your flight," Zack said. "I strongly believe it will never go back to the way it was because people realize there is an alternative that may be more efficient going forward."
Still, that efficiency can come at a price. Zoom just released a draft design on GitHub for end-to-end encryption as part of its plan for "major security and privacy upgrades." Previously, Zoom software raised privacy concerns as the communication application became a widely reported target for hackers.
While not as threatening as a full-blown data breach, partner Aliette Rodz of Shutts & Bowen in Miami warns other lawyers of a severe mistake that litigators can make when utilizing remote communications — the possibility of revealing documentation that could jeopardize confidential conversations. Her recommendation is to make sure that before sharing your screen, you set up links to the documents you intend to share on your desktop to ensure you are not sharing information about other documents or clients in your database.
"Have your documents properly earmarked so you're not going into your own database because otherwise, you would be showing your database to the people that are on your Zoom hearing," Rodz said. "You have attorney-client privileges. It's prudent to make sure."
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 All11th Circ.: Contempt Conviction Against Nonparty Requires Proof of Aiding and Abetting Bound Party
St. Thomas University Renames Law School After Civil Rights Attorney Ben Crump
4 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Read the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing 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