Superior Court Judges Propose Rule Allowing Video Trials
The Georgia Council of Superior Court Judge has proposed amending a court rule to permit non-jury civil trials as well as civil pretrial proceedings to be conducted by remote video conference.
May 04, 2020 at 07:42 PM
4 minute read
The Georgia Council of Superior Court Judges is proposing to amend its current uniform rules to allow civil non-jury trials to be conducted by video conference.
The proposal, drafted as an amendment to Rule 9.1 of the Uniform Rules of Superior Court, would allow video conference trials only in cases where a constitutional right to trial by jury does not apply, or where the parties have waived their right to a jury trial.
"We got struck with a reality no one wanted, no one prepared for," said Superior Court Judge Wade Padgett of the the Augusta Judicial Circuit and president-elect of the state Council of Superior Court Judges. "As a court system, we had to adapt … We have to make the rules correspond not only with our needs but the law."
Rule 9.1 currently permits telephone, but not videoconferencing, but only for pretrial or posttrial proceedings in civil actions. The Supreme Court of Georgia temporarily amended the rule March 27 to permit the use of video conferences as well as telephone conferences for the duration of the statewide judicial emergency.
On Monday, Chief Justice Harold Melton announced he is extending the statewide judicial emergency, which is now set to expire June 12.
The draft amendment under consideration would, if approved by the Supreme Court, remain in effect for 180 days after the current judicial emergency expires.
Accommodations would be made to preserve privileged attorney-client communications. To ensure that a video trial would be accessible to the public, notice must be given to the parties and the public that a proceeding will take place by remote video conference. The public would be provided the opportunity to view the video conference either by joining it, through a live video stream or other similar means.
The Supreme Court is soliciting comments on the proposal from the bench, members of the State Bar of Georgia and the public through 4 p.m. Wednesday. Comments can be emailed to [email protected].
Padgett said the judiciary had begun working with prosecutors, public defenders, county sheriffs, and the state Board of Corrections about conducting remote criminal arraignments from the state's prisons that even before Melton issued his first judicial emergency declaration in March. It was efficient, inexpensive and secure, he said.
Padgett said he has already conducted civil trials involving divorces and custody during the judicial emergency. He and a number of other judges across the state have already begun offering to preside over civil and domestic non-jury trials for anyone who wants them.
Once the pandemic has sufficiently abated, he said, "We are going to have demands on courtroom space like we never had." But, he added, the courts would also likely have limitations on what were once 100-person calendar calls and on large jury pools for multiple juries.
The amended rule gives the courts the ability during the judicial emergency "to get more done effectively than we could otherwise."
Lyle Griffin Warshauer, president of the Georgia Trial Lawyers Association, said trial lawyers "will support anything that will move civil cases along with respect to discovery, motion practice and ultimately the resolution of cases."
While her members are, by definition, trial lawyers who like jury trials, she said video teleconferencing "makes perfect sense" for non-jury trials where the parties all agree. She said that she is hopeful the pretrial proceedings will include resolution of discovery dispute and motion hearings.
"Everyone is thinking about it," she added. "We are very glad to know at the highest levels that people are thinking about what needs to be done to avoid what's going to be an inevitable backlog of cases when we come out of this."
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 AllGeorgia Appeals Court Cancels Hearing in Election Interference Case Against Trump
3 minute readJustice Department Says Fulton County Jail Conditions Violate Detainee Rights
6 minute readSupreme Court Rejects Push to Move Georgia Case Against Ex-Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows
3 minute read3 GOP States Join Paid Sick Leave Movement, Passing Ballot Measures by Wide Margins
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1King & Spalding E-Discovery Director Jumps to Nebraska Women-Owned Firm
- 2Nation's Largest Utility Parts Ways With CLO Who Helped It Navigate Bribery Scandal
- 3Advocates Renew Campaign for Immigrant Right to Counsel in New York
- 4From ‘Unregulated’ to ‘A Matter of Great Concern’: PFAS Regulation under Biden
- 5Public Interest Lawyers in NY Fear Rollback of Federal Loan Assistance in '25, Ask Gov. to Add $4M to State Program
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