Federal Courts Restrict Jury Trials to Slow the Spread of COVID-19
All criminal and civil trials scheduled to begin before April 30 have been postponed.
March 16, 2020 at 12:52 PM
3 minute read
In an effort to stem the spread of COVID-19, New Jersey's federal courts are imposing a moratorium on jury trials.
Effective Monday, all criminal and civil trials scheduled to begin before April 30 are continued. But deadlines set under federal or local rules or by court orders remain in effect, unless modified by the judge assigned to the case, according to the order signed by Chief Judge Freda Wolfson. Judges may be flexible and accommodating to requests for adjustments in filing or scheduling that are necessitated by travel considerations, health or safety concerns, or directives from public officials, the court said.
The move in New Jersey comes as court systems across the nation grapple with the virus, also known as the novel coronavirus. In New York, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has said "regular argued appeals and motions calendars will be heard as scheduled." Lawyers or pro se litigators are obligated to notify the court if they have traveled to any of the countries hardest hit within the past 14 days, been diagnosed with COVID-19 or had contact with a person who has the disease, or are in a heightened risk group. Similar orders were issued in the district courts and the state courts.
Even the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday took the drastic step of postponing oral arguments. It's rare for the high court to cancel arguments, but those scheduled for March 23-25 and March 30-April 1 have been pushed back.
The high court said the decision is not unprecedented. The justices did not hold arguments for October 1918 because of the Spanish flu epidemic. And the court shortened its argument calendars in August 1793 and August 1798 in response to yellow fever outbreaks.
Back in New Jersey, the District Court order said criminal defendants or prosecutors, or litigants in a civil trial, may seek relief from provisions of the order from the judge assigned to their case. But any request for convening a jury trial during the period covered by the order is to be decided by the chief judge, the order states.
In addition, the period from March 16 to April 30 shall be "excluded time" under the Speedy Trial Act, as the court finds the interests served by taking such an action outweigh the interests in providing a speedy trial.
Judges are free to conduct hearings, conferences, sentencings, change-of-plea hearings, and bench trials as they see fit. Judges are encouraged to conduct proceedings by telephone or videoconferencing and to take measures to avoid out-of-town travel of any litigant, witness or attorney. Neutrals in alternative dispute resolution proceedings are authorized to permit participation by video or teleconference.
Sitting grand juries are authorized to continue to meet, but no new grand juries are to be empaneled between March 16 and April 30. If no grand jury is available, the 30-day time period for filing an indictment shall be tolled, the order said.
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 All'You Became a Corrupt Politician': Judge Gives Prison Time to Former Sen. Robert Menendez for Corruption Conviction
5 minute readFederal Judge Pauses Trump Funding Freeze as Democratic AGs Plan Suit
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Troutman Pepper, Claiming Ex-Associate's Firing Was Performance Related, Seeks Summary Judgment in Discrimination Suit
- 2Law Firm Fails to Get Punitive Damages From Ex-Client
- 3Over 700 Residents Near 2023 Derailment Sue Norfolk for More Damages
- 4Decision of the Day: Judge Sanctions Attorney for 'Frivolously' Claiming All Nine Personal Injury Categories in Motor Vehicle Case
- 5Second Judge Blocks Trump Federal Funding Freeze
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