Juror Walks Off to Take Phone Call as Texas Tests First Jury Trial Via Zoom
In what may be a first across the United States since the coronavirus pandemic canceled jury trials, Texas judges on Monday invited a jury pool to a court proceeding over video teleconference. Monday's hearing in an insurance dispute was actually a "summary jury trial," which is an alternative dispute resolution process.
May 18, 2020 at 12:54 PM
4 minute read
In what might be a first across the United States, Texas judges on Monday invited a jury pool to a court proceeding over video teleconference.
And they found jury selection unfolded pretty seamlessly over about an hour and a half, with only one hiccup: A juror wandered off screen during a break and couldn't hear the judges calling him back. Senior Judge Keith Dean said it was the digital version of at the courthouse, when court staff occasionally have to track down a juror in the hallway taking a phone call.
As the coronavirus pandemic shuttered courthouses across the nation this spring, Texas emerged as a leader in embracing Zoom video conferences for judges to continue holding court proceedings remotely. Texas judges have already been using the technology for bench trials—but a jury trial is another matter.
|'Courthouse has come to you'
Monday's hearing in an insurance dispute was actually a "summary jury trial," which is an alternative dispute resolution process in which the parties participate in a one-day jury trial, followed the next day by a mediation session to attempt to settle the dispute. The jury selection was livestreamed on YouTube, and the rest of the proceeding was private.
"For centuries, if you had jury duty, you have to go to the courthouse. In this case, the courthouse has come to you," said Dean, a senior judge and mediator in the Dallas-Fort Worth region who previously served as judge of the 265th District Court and the Dallas County Criminal Court No. 5.
For the first 30 minutes of the proceeding, 470th District Judge Emily Miskel of Collin County welcomed all of the 26 prospective jurors—another three people failed to report to jury duty—and asked what type of device they were connecting with, and patiently walked them through how to set up their their audio and video correctly.
Miskel, who only participated in the proceeding to handle the technological aspects of the Zoom meeting, added that she appreciated those prospective jurors who had called her office to make sure their jury duty summons was not a scam.
Attorneys Matthew Pearson, founder of Pearson Legal in San Antonio, and senior associate Valerie Cantu, were representing the plaintiff.
"This is as strange for us as it is for you," Pearson told jurors.
Pearson explained that his client, Virtuwave Holdings, owns a building in McKinney that suffered hail damage in March 2017. The company is suing its insurance company, State Farm Lloyds, alleging that it did not pay the benefits that it should have paid. Virtuwave seeks money damages from State Farm, Pearson told jurors during voir dire.
Defense counsel Amy Stewart, partner in Stewart Law Group in Dallas, and associate John Stone represent State Farm.
Stewart said, "How exciting is this that we all get to experience this together for the first time—we know in Texas—but maybe even in the country?"
|Approaching the bench
During the jury selection process, the attorneys questioned only 12 prospective jurors at a time. Miskel created a Zoom "breakout room" for the other 14 prospective jurors.
For the first group, the lawyers on both sides went through lists of questions about prospective jurors' views about insurance companies, their personal knowledge of the hail storm in question and more.
Dean then asked the attorneys to approach the bench. How? Miskel created a separate breakout room just for the judge and counsel.
When they came back, a hiccup: One of the prospective jurors had wandered off-screen and could be heard talking on the phone. No response when the judges told him to come back, since his computer audio was hooked into headphones he was not wearing.
Finally, the man returned, and Dean announced that the attorneys for both sides had picked that first group of 12 jurors, which meant the 14 people who had been in a separate breakout room all along were "free to go about your day," Dean said.
Related stories:
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 AllTrending 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