How COVID-19 Is Impacting California Courts: Roundup of Services
State courts across California have reduced operations due to a resurgence in COVID-19 cases. Here's a look at how courts across the state are grappling with obstacles posed by the novel coronavirus pandemic.
July 13, 2020 at 01:00 PM
17 minute read
This list was updated on 12/152020 at 11:25 AM
California courts have spent most of the year grappling with the COVID-19 pandemic, wildfires and budget cuts. And just when courts were finding their footing in balancing operations with safety measures, the number of COVID-19 infections surged again.
In response, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye on Dec. 7 issued an advisory reminding court leaders of the steps they can take.
"Because our 58 trial courts and six appellate districts face different impacts from the latest COVID-19 surge, and have different capacities and resources, statewide orders for case processing, at this time, are inappropriate and would impair the flexibility trial and appellate courts need to respond to local conditions and access to justice," Cantil-Sakauye wrote.
Here's a look at how courts across the state are grappling with all the changes associated with the novel coronavirus as of Dec. 15
Alameda County Superior Court: The court announced no new service changes tied to the latest stay-at-home orders. Services will be reduced during the weeks of Dec. 21 and Dec. 28 due to funding cutbacks, however.
The court had already extended the stay on writs of possession in unlawful detainer matters through Dec. 31.
Alpine County Superior Court: The court is hearng most matters remotely.
Amador County Superior Court: "Effective December 14, 2020 through January 11, 2021, the Amador Superior Court will operate on a modified schedule, hearing only limited calendars. All calendars will be heard remotely if possible." According to a general order, the court expects to hear only criminal matters, no-time-waiver jury trials, dependency matters, delinquency matters, LPS conservatorships, unlawful detainers, emergency family law matters and restraining orders. The clerk's office is closed to the general public through Dec. 31.
Butte County Superior Court: An order by the presiding judge continued all criminal division jury trials through Jan. 4. A Nov. 20 order says witnesses in criminal preliminary and evidentiary hearings shall appear remotely.
The chief justice issued a sixth emergency order on Dec. 4 authorizing the court to delay criminal trials by up to 30 days if they were scheduled to start between Dec. 7 and Jan. 8.
Calaveras County Superior Court: The court issued a Dec. 1 general order requiring everyone entering the courthouse, including law enforcement, to wear a face covering.
Colusa County Superior Court: The court continues to offer limited services. Attorneys and parties are encouraged to appear remotely in many cases.
Contra Costa County Superior Court: The court enacted a partial closure on Dec. 7 that will continue until further notice. Jury trials have been suspended with the exception of criminal preliminary hearings with time not waived. Jurors summonsed to report on or before Jan. 11 do not have to appear. Clerk's offices are closed to the public.
The chief justice issued a 15th emergency order for the court on Dec. 10 extending the time to start criminal trials by 30 days in cases where the deadline would have expired between Dec. 14 and Jan. .12.
Del Norte County Superior Court: The clerk's office is closed to the public until further notice due to rising COVID-19 cases.
El Dorado County Superior Court: The court vacated and reset all civil jury trials between Dec. 3 and Jan. 31. The chief justice issued a third emergency order for the court on Dec. 2 authorizing a 30-day delay in starting criminal trials that were schedueld to begin between Dec. 3 and Jan. 31.
Fresno County Superior Court: The court has suspended civil and criminal jury trials until Jan. 11. Out-of-custody and probation violation hearings have been delayed. Court executive officer Michael Elliott spelled out operations changes in a Dec. 14 memo.
The chief justice issued a ninth emergency order for the court last month authorizing the court to extend by 30 days the deeadline for starting criminal trials in cases where the deadline would have fallen between Nov. 19 and Jan. 8.
Glenn County Superior Court: The court is operating under normal COVID-19 protocols.
Humboldt County Superior Court: The court has reset criminal jury trials scheduled to begin between Dec. 8 and Jan. 19. The clerk's office lobby will remain closed through Jan. 19. The court has set up a health screening station for all in-person case attendants. Remote appearances are required for non-criminal cases.
The chief justice issued a fourth emergency order for the court on Dec. 7 authorizing the court to delay by up to 30 days the start of criminal trials in cases where the deadline would have otherwise expired between Dec. 8 and Jan. 19.
Imperial County Superior Court: As of Dec. 9, the court returned to remote-only proceedings in many case types. In-person proceedings are taking place on a case-by-case basis. The Brawley and Winterhaven courthouses remain closed except for those appearing at a kiosk for a remote apperance.
The chief justice issued a fifth emergency order for the court on Nov. 19 authorizing the court to extend the deadline for starting trials by up to 30 days in cases where the deadline would have expired between Nov. 19 and Dec. 1i8.
Inyo County Superior Court: The court has not reported a new operational changes.
Kern County Superior Court: The court has barred the transfer of correctional facility inmates to the Kern County jail for appearances in misdemeanor, family division, and juvenile court matters through Dec. 31.
The chief justice issued a seventh emergency order on Dec. 1 authorizing the court to delay for up to 30 days the start of criminal trials in any case where the deadline would have expired between Dec. 1 and and Jan. 29.
Kings County Superior Court: The court on Nov. 20 extended by 30 days the deadline for starting a criminal trial for cases where the deadline would have expired between Nov. 22 and Dec. 22. The extension was authorized by an emergency order issued by the chief justice on Nov. 19.
Lake County Superior Court: As of Dec. 7, the court is restricting in-person appearances by defendants. Most proceedings are taking place remotely. No jury trials will take place before Dec. 30.
Lassen County Superior Court: Access to the courthouse is limited. Filing documents must be done at the courthouse dropbox or through the mail.
Los Angeles County Superior Court: A Dec. 3 order extends the deadline for holding a preliminary examination from 10 court days to 30 court days. The deadline for holding a criminal trial has been extended for up to 30 days for cases where the deadline would have otherwise expired between Dec. 2 and Dec. 31.
Deadlines for dependency hearings were also extended.
The chief justice issued an 11th emergency order for the court on Dec. 2 authorizing the court to hold session anywhere in the county and authorizing the extension of deadlines in several case types through the rest of the year.
Madera County Superior Court: The chief justice issued a ninth emergency order for the court authorizing the court to extend by up to 30 days the starts of criminal trials where the deadline to do so would have expired between Nov. 15 and Dec. 15.
Marin County Superior Court: The court on Dec. 11 issued an administrative order allowing proceedings to take place anywhere in the county through Jan. 9. The order also authorizes the extension of time in calculating certain statutory deadlines and for holding criminal trials.
Mariposa County Superior Court: The court has not noticed any revised procedures.
Mendocino County Superior Court: Jury trials scheduled to start between Dec. 7 and Jan. 8 have been vacated and will be re-set. A Dec. 4 order of the presiding judge allows any judge to extend the deadline for starting a crimnal trial by up to 30 days in cases where the deadline would otherwise expire between Dec. 7 and Jan. 8.
Merced County Superior Court: Remote appearances are strongly encouraged and may be required in some courtrooms. The court updated its operations procedures by courtroom on Dec. 11. Court trials will be heard remotely if possible.
Modoc County Superior Court: The court resumed regular court operations on June 1.
Mono County Superior Court: The court has not noticed new procedures in response to the latest wave of COVID-19 cases.
Monterey County Superior Court: The court has not announced new procedures in response to the latest wave of COVID-19 cases. A Dec. 9 article in the Monterey County Weekly reported that an attorney in criminal case recently tested positive for the novel coronavirus while the jury was deliberating a verdict.
Napa County Superior Court: The court has canceled jury trials through at least Jan. 8. The court is also consolidating calendars and encouraging, if not requiring, remote appearances in some cases. The chief justice issued a fourth emergency order for the court on Dec. 1 authorizing court leaders to extend by up to 30 days the deadline to start a criminal trial for those cases where the deadline would have otherwise expired between Dec. 7 and Jan. 8.
Nevada County Superior Court: A Dec. 4 emergency order by the chief justice authorized the court to delay the start of jury trial cases for up to 30 days if the statutory deadline would have otherwise expired between Dec. 8 and Jan. 29.
Orange County Superior Court: The court has suspended new civil and probate in-person court trials and jury trials through Jan. 29. Small claims trials set between Dec. 14 and Jan. 29 are being rescheduled. Only criminal proceedings required to prevent the dismissal of charges against defendants will be held in the short-term.
A recent order by the court requires attorneys to scan a QR code before entering a courtroom as part of a contact-tracing program.
Placer County Superior Court: An emergency order issued by the chief justice on Dec. 4 authorizes the court to extend the statutory deadlines in certain cases. The court announced in November that only critically necessary criminal and civil trials are being held.
Plumas County Superior Court: The court has not posted operations changes in resopnse to the latest wave of COVID-19 infections.
Riverside County Superior Court: The court has suspended the start of all new jury trials through Dec. 31. The chief justice issued an 18th emergency order for the court, authorizing delays of up to 30 days for starting criminal trials that would otherwise have had to begin between Dec. 1 and Dec. 31.
Sacramento County Superior Court: The court has suspended the start of new criminal trials and jury service until Jan. 4. An emergency order signed by the chief justice allows the court to delay the start of criminal trials through the end of year while authorizing court sessions to be held anywhere in the county, including jail.
San Benito County Superior Court: The court has not posted new operations changes in response to the increase in COVID-19 infections.
San Bernardino County Superior Court: The court hass postponed new jury trials until the stay-at-home order expires. Court locations remain open with safety protocols in place.
San Diego County Superior Court: The court has extended the deadline for starting criminal trials by up to 30 days for cases where the deadline would have otherwise expired between Dec. 11 and Jan. 18. The chief justice issued a 20th emergency order for the court on Nov. 25 extending the time in which a defendant must be taken before a magistrate from 48 hours to up to seven days in cases where the deadline would otherwise expire between Nov. 29 and Dec. 24.
San Francisco Superior Court: The court closed the civil filings office until further notice on Dec. 7 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Jurors are still being called as necessary, according to the court's website.
San Joaquin County Superior Court: The court has not posted new operations changes.
San Luis Obispo County Superior Court: The chief justice issued a tenth emergency order for the court on Nov. 19 extending statutory deadlines in several categories of cases through Dec. 18.
San Mateo County Superior Court: The court has continued numerous proceedings through Jan. 8. New criminal and civil jury trials have been suspended through Jan. 8. New civil court trials except for unlawful detainer court trials are suspended through Dec. 31.
Santa Barbara County Superior Court: The chief justice issued an emergency order for the court on Nov. 13 allowing the court to hold sessions anywhere in the county, including jail, and to delay the srart of criminal trials in cases where the deadline to do so would have expired between Nov. 17 and Dec. 16.
Santa Clara County Superior Court: The court will not be calling new jury panels until at least Jan. 4. Court operations will be reduced between Dec. 21 and Jan. 4 due to a planned furlough period. The court is also trying to limit the number of people inside a courthouse to 20 percent of the building's capacity.
The chief justice issued a 19th emergency order for the court on Dec. 2 declaring the period between Dec. 1 and Dec. 31 a court holiday for purposes of calculating deadlines under sections of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
Santa Cruz County Superior Court: A Dec. 1 general order allows a judge to extend the start of a criminal trial by up to 30 days in cases where the deadline would have otherwise expired between Nov. 23 and Jan. 8.
Shasta County Superior Court: The chief justice issued a fifth emergency order for the court on Dec. 1 authorizing an extension of up to 30 days in the start of criminal trials where the deadline would otherwise have expired between Dec. 1 and Dec. 30.
Sierra County Superior Court: The court has not posted any new changes to operations.
Siskiyou County Superior Court: The chief justice issued an emergency order for the court on Nov. 30 authorizing delays of up to 30 days to start criminal jury trials that would have been required to begin between Dec. 15 and Feb. 22. The three-page order also extends other deadlines. A Dec. 3 order by the court's presiding judge says that civil jury trials have been vacated until further notice.
Solano County Superior Court: The court is posting notices of continued hearings due to reduced operations on its website.
Sonoma County Superior Court: The chief justice issued an eighth emergency order for the court on Dec. 1 allowing sessions to be held anywhere in the county, including jails, and extending by up to 30 days the deadline for starting criminal trials in cases where the deadline would have expired between Dec. 1 and Jan. 31.
The court has made several operations changes to reduce the number of people who must come to the courthouse.
"The Sonoma County Public Library has a Zoom kiosk available starting December 14, 2020, for use by persons over the age of 65 years who have filed an application for a restraining order."
Stanislaus County Superior Court: The chief justice issued a 12th emergency order for the court on Dec. 9 extendng numerous deadlines and allowing court sessions to be held anywhere in the county through Jan. 7. Clerks offices are closed until further notice.
Sutter County Superior Court: The court has not posted information about new operatoins changes.
Tehama County Superior Court: The court has nto posted information about new operations changes.
Trinity County Superior Court: The court is open and allowing some proceedings to take place remotely.
Tulare County Superior Court: Public service counters are closed and appointments are no longer being accepted. Court offices close to the public at 1 p.m. Criminal and civil trials have been suspended through December. "Access to the courthouse facilities will be limited to only those individuals who have matters on calendar and are not represented by counsel."
The chief justice issued an eighth emergency order for the court on Nov. 19 authorizing court sessions anywhere in the county, including jail, and extendnig the deadline for starting a criminal trial by up to 30 days in cases where that deadline would have otherwise expired between Nov. 21 and Jan. 22.
Tuolumne County Superior Court: The chief justice issued a fifth emergency order for the court on Dec. 11 allowing the court to hold sessions anywhere in the county, including jail, through Jan. 9. The order also authorizes extensions in certain statutory deadlines, including those for the start of criminal trials and for bringing a felony defendant before a magistrate.
Ventura County Superior Court: The chief justice issued a ninth emergency order for the court on Nov. 30 authorizing extensions in the deadline for holding a criminal trial by up to 30 days for cases where the deadline would have otherwise expired between Nov. 30 and Jan. 29. The related court order is here.
The court has already announced closure days over the next six months due to budget cutbacks.
Yolo County Superior Court: The chief justice has issued a fourth emergency order for the court on Dec. 2 extending the deadline for starting criminal trials by up to 30 days in cases where the deadline would have otherwise expired between Nov. 30 and Dec. 30. The court's related order is here. The court has excused jurors who were summonsed to appear between Nov. 39 and Dec. 29.
Yuba County Superior Court: The court has not announced new changes in operations.
The California Supreme Court: The court on March 16 suspended in-person oral arguments until "deemed prudent to resume normal measures." Counsel are appearing by video or telephone. All oral argument sessions will be held in San Francisco.
California Courts of Appeal: The courts of appeal continue to hold oral arguments by remote appearance.
Commission on Judicial Performance: The commission's offices are temporarily closed to the public. The agency is continuing to accept complaints submitted by mail.
State Bar of California:The bar's offices in Los Angeles and San Francisco re-closed to the public on Dec. 4. The bar continues to field questions via email and phone.
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 All'Appropriate Relief'?: Google Offers Remedy Concessions in DOJ Antitrust Fight
4 minute read'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute read‘It's Your Funeral’: On Avoiding Damaging Your Client’s Case With Uncivil Behavior
Practice Tips From—and About—the New Judges on the Northern District of California Bench
Trending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
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