Virtual Arbitration: 10 Tips for a Fair and Efficient Process
The coronavirus pandemic has affected alternative dispute resolution (ADR) efforts, and parties with pending arbitration have been considering using various videoconferencing platforms instead of waiting for in-person hearings.
April 30, 2020 at 11:15 AM
6 minute read
The coronavirus pandemic has changed how we do everyday things like connecting with friends and buying groceries, and it has affected our alternative dispute resolution (ADR) efforts as well. Parties with pending arbitration hearings have been considering using various videoconferencing platforms instead. JAMS has been developing and promoting the use of remote technology for a number of years, and in recent weeks has increased its frequency of virtual trainings for its neutrals on various platforms such as Zoom. Of course, parties are free to choose any other platform that suits their needs.
Here are 10 tips for using videoconferencing platforms for arbitrations.
- Procedures. The parties and their attorneys must decide whether they want to submit their case on the papers, delay the hearing, or use Zoom or another virtual arbitration platform. During a recent status conference held via Zoom, counsel expressed their preference for an in-person hearing but agreed to use Zoom if our Resolution Center is still closed by the scheduled hearing date. If Zoom is to be used, there will be another status conference to discuss the details and agree on procedures. Those details will be set forth by the arbitrators in a revised scheduling order so that all participants understand the process.
- Virtual Depositions. In arbitrations, depositions are usually limited. However, in preparation for the hearing, depositions may be taken virtually if the parties and their counsel agree. Care must be taken to ensure the attorneys have access to the necessary documents, either via a screen share or on a thumb drive. Thereafter, the witnesses may appear at the virtual hearing to be examined.
- Written Testimony. In order to save time during the hearing, counsel may agree to submit the direct testimony of some or all of the witnesses in writing in advance of the hearing, along with copies of the key documents related to that testimony. Then the witnesses must be available for cross-examination at the hearings. This approach is commonly used in international arbitrations, where depositions are rarely used.
- Expert Witnesses. The process for expert witnesses may be similar to that for percipient witnesses, with experts being required to provide reports that will be used as summaries of direct examination. Thereafter, the experts must be cross-examined at the hearing.
- Privacy and Confidentiality. There have been concerns about the reliability of Zoom's recording feature, as well as how it ensures confidentiality. It is important to protect intellectual property or financial information that may be discussed in an arbitration from being obtained by a non-party. In a complex commercial case, it may be best to hire a court reporter to prepare a reliable transcript. It's also important to note that JAMS uses the Zoom HIPAA-compliant platform for all scheduled virtual proceedings, including mediations and arbitrations. This Zoom platform incorporates the necessary security features to satisfy the requirements of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).
- Scheduling. A virtual hearing may require more time than an in-person hearing, so having a schedule (and adhering to it) is important. Counsel should prepare a detailed schedule and submit it to the arbitrator a few days in advance of the hearing. Each side should estimate the time needed for its presentation. As is often done, counsel should discuss splitting the available time 50/50, as that will encourage efficiency and a focus on the most important issues.
- 24-Hour Notice of Witnesses. In order to assure a fair process and deal with the unforeseen circumstances that may arise in any hearing, each side should notify the opposition at least 24 hours in advance of any witnesses it intends to call. This will allow everyone to be prepared and give counsel time to negotiate regarding any witness schedules that may need to be adjusted.
- Technical Specialists. Much of the evidence in any arbitration consists of documents. It is common in a big case for each side to enlist a technical assistant to present the documents onscreen and to troubleshoot any problems that arise. It is important to have at least one specialist present for a virtual arbitration if there will be numerous documents offered in evidence.
- Necessary Equipment. Much detailed information is available online about the equipment necessary to participate in a virtual hearing. However, the most important items are simply a laptop computer with a built-in webcam and a source of light so that each participant can be seen clearly. In a document-heavy case, participants should have all exhibits on a thumb drive. They may also want to use a second laptop just for reviewing the exhibits, perhaps using Zoom's dual-monitor feature. Some participants may wish to use an external microphone or a headset, but these are not necessary.
Each participant should practice using the chosen platform ahead of time in order to work out any technical issues. The arbitrator will deactivate the recording function to maintain confidentiality. Further, some providers will furnish a moderator to greet the parties at the beginning of the hearing.
- Contact Information. The participants must plan for the possibility that someone will be disconnected at some point during the hearing. All participants should exchange email addresses and phone numbers. Additionally, JAMS assigns a highly skilled video conference moderator who can navigate the specific features and assist the arbitrator should any problems arise.
In order to help companies and others obtain prompt resolution of their disputes and move forward with business during this time of social distancing, parties with cases set for arbitration may find virtual arbitration to be an attractive option. Likewise, parties with cases set for civil trial might also consider using the arbitration process. Courts generally are not holding civil trials at this time. When the courts resume operation, there will be a huge backlog. Arbitration is a flexible process that can be tailored to each case. Businesspeople waiting for trial might consider entering into an arbitration submission agreement in order to achieve resolution of their international and domestic disputes.
Zee Claiborne is an arbitrator and mediator with JAMS resolving domestic and international business disputes.
|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 AllSouthern California Law Firms Boast Industry-Leading Revenue, Demand Through Q3
Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
Lost in the Legal Maze: How State Regulations Are Hindering Hemp Operators' Success
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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