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
© 2025 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's Governor Details Spending Plans but Not His Top Priority of Lawsuit Reform
6 minute readFourth Circuit Seeks More Legal Briefs in Unresolved N.C. Supreme Court Election
4 minute readFulton DA Seeks to Overturn Her Disqualification From Trump Georgia Election Case
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Courts Grapple With The Corporate Transparency Act
- 2FTC Chair Lina Khan Sues John Deere Over 'Right to Repair,' Infuriates Successor
- 3‘Facebook’s Descent Into Toxic Masculinity’ Prompts Stanford Professor to Drop Meta as Client
- 4Pa. Superior Court: Sorority's Interview Notes Not Shielded From Discovery in Lawsuit Over Student's Death
- 5Kraken’s Chief Legal Officer Exits, Eyes Role in Trump Administration
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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