Zoom Court, The Future is Now.

How can we possibly get justice without live, in-person court proceedings?  Ever hear "Justice delayed, is justice denied"?  Courts have closed all over.  But why, if litigation by Zoom, virtual, electronic, digital court is possible right now?  And in many ways, such virtual, or digital litigation is much better than in-court hearings.  And we NEED it, at least as an option.  Before we discuss the pros and cons, let's at least acknowledge the extreme consequences, the loss of civilized justice, that is inevitable if the courts were to be closed to those that need them.  Whatever the alternative, it almost is inevitably better than no court, no legal system, no path to justice.  When in-person court proceedings (hearings, conferences and trials) are not allowed, we simply must improvise.  And improvisation is nothing new to our legal system (although we are almost always too slow with our improvising).  Electronic filing of cases and documents has finally arrived, but only recently.  For the majority of my 32 years as a practicing lawyer (so far), lawsuits had to be hand-filed at the courthouse, during business hours.  This was costly and nerve-wracking.  We had to go in person, or send someone to physically file the case or document at the courthouse.  And if it was the last day before the deadline, we always prayed there was no traffic gridlock on the way to court, no line at court, no mistake in the documents, that we had a check for the proper filing fee, etc.  Today, we simply click "send" to file documents.  So I am of the opinion that Trial by Zoom (or Google or Microsoft or any of the multitude of other video platforms), is better than in-court proceedings for many reasons, and is here to stay, even after courthouses re-open.  We are already getting acclimatized and litigation is actually getting to be more efficient (when court is to start at 9, it starts at 9 and when it ends, we are already back at our office or home- and by the way, clients don't get charged for lawyers to drive to and from court).

Trial by Zoom was thrust upon me in an interesting way and very early on during the pandemic.  I teach a law school jury trial class at Emory Law School.  Typically for the final trial, students go to the courthouse and we have real judges handle their cases in real courtrooms.  This year we did it all by Zoom.  We were lucky to have the technical help of Emory University as a back up, but it went so much better than we all feared, that I immediately became an advocate for trials by video connection.  I couldn't believe all of the positives I recognized and I wrote a piece for Law.com which can be found by clicking here.  For example, instead of lawyers jumping up and rudely yelling "OBJECTION", they simply raised an "Objection Paddle" to the screen.  Unlike any trial I have ever attended, everyone was right on time, even the judges.  And no one had to carry boxes of documents into and out of their car, through security, onto elevators and into a court room. All of the evidentiary documents were pre-loaded and simply shared on the screen at the appropriate time.  How efficient.  And oh how the judges loved that. 

Then came the inquiries.  From clients, courts (judges talk and word spreads) and from the media. And the discussion was on.  Here are a few interviews I did on this topic, click any to review if you wish -  Public Radio, Mediation Community and Family Lawyer Magazine.  It was and is inevitable that video conferencing will provide access to justice.  As Family Law attorneys, we represent parents struggling to see their children or to obtain child support and others who need to simply move forward in heir lives.  They cannot and should not accept an answer like "well, the courts have shut down and we don't know when they will re-open".  Judges across the country have recognized this and are implementing, authorizing and encouraging the use of video and audio technology to keep the wheels of justice in motion.  For instance, click here to see the recent Order from the Supreme Court of Georgia on this issue. It isn't perfect, and may never be. Certainly the question of how to have a fair jury trial is still being worked on (happened once in Texas already), but we will get there.  We will figure out how to offer jurors access to Wi-Fi and maybe even offer them secure devices to participate from home or elsewhere.  And when courthouses re-open, they will and should be less crowded.  The use of video and other technology will play an incredible role in the evolution of our system of justice.  And it will save tremendous cost.  We will need less staff at the courthouse, less security, less wear and tear on the buildings.  And while trial lawyers may begrudge not being able to put on a show in the courtroom arena, the system should run more smoothly.  By the way, as a divorce lawyer (and even if I wasn't, the following point is obvious), how many divorcing spouses truly want to be in the same room as their soon-to-be ex when all of their dirty laundry is being aired?  And again, even after the pandemic and quarantining ends, this new technology will expedite matters and perhaps move our system along faster than it moved pre-Covid19.  And isn't that better? After all, justice delayed, is justice denied.