The Future of the Virtual Courthouse
| Publication year | 2021 |
| Author | By Honorable Samuel T. McAdam |
By Honorable Samuel T. McAdam
The Honorable Samuel T. McAdam is the Supervising Judge of the Civil Division of Yolo Superior Court. Appointed in 2008, he served during the start of the pandemic as the court's Presiding Judge in 2019-2020. Before becoming a judge, he was a partner at Seyfarth Shaw LLP, where he practiced employment law.
On Sunday, March 15, 2020, the leaders of Yolo Superior Court gathered at the courthouse and listened to the Governor's directives regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. That afternoon, the court developed a plan to provide fair and timely justice in a safe environment. It was critical to keep all courtrooms open and to maximize public access but also to reduce the "footprint" at the courthouse, given widespread stay-at-home orders.
The next day, the court began building a "virtual courthouse," allowing remote video appearances using Zoom and livestreaming public access on YouTube. Within days, a talented and dedicated court staff—living and working under their own personal pandemic pressures—had created virtual courtrooms for each division of the court. Over the next few weeks, all virtual courtrooms became fully operational and delays in hearings and trials were eliminated.
Now, over a year later, as the threat of the pandemic subsides and society re-opens, we ask: What is the future of the virtual courthouse? The court surveyed all its judges from every division and learned that despite the unique nature of each calendar, it was universally believed that the virtual courthouse should remain open. The answer is a hybrid approach identifying and facilitating the best features of both in-person and virtual court hearings.
As a starting point, a virtual courthouse is only as good as the technology used, not just by the court, but by the lawyers and litigants. Each participant should have high quality Internet service allowing clear video and audio. The greatest limitation and the most serious problem arising from remote appearances is poor connectivity.
Surprisingly, some judges found self-represented litigants able to use smart phones from a parked car more effectively than lawyers attempting to log-in from the office. Moreover, too many lawyers still default to telephone use when video access is available. In any event, the legal profession should add its voice to the calls of society to improve broadband access for all, including especially the poor and rural communities. Court hearings, like school classes and tele-medicine depend on an infrastructure that supports universal access.
Lawyers also need to dedicate themselves to the practice of appearing in the virtual courthouse. Beyond ensuring connectivity, lawyers should master the details of using the name feature on the screen, using a direct camera angle where the face is easily visible, speaking in turn without interrupting others, publishing exhibits via shared screens, knowing how to enter and use break-out rooms for client or bench conferences, and using a steady and slower pace in making arguments and examining witnesses.
As for the court, the hybrid approach requires the use of a high-resolution video screen. In Yolo, the courtrooms are equipped with an overhead projector and a large screen facing the jury box. To use it, the courtroom lights must...
To continue reading
Request your trial