Small Law Firms

In-Person Court Conferences Should Not Be Completely Eliminated

Although court conferences may not need to occur in person as frequently as before the pandemic, eliminating in-person conferences may do damage to the judicial process.

By  
on

One of the biggest impacts that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on the legal profession is that numerous court conferences, oral arguments, and other judicial functions have been held remotely over the past year. Of course, it makes sense that such activities were performed remotely during the pandemic to keep everyone safe and provide a means for attorneys and litigants to participate in court functions in an efficient way. As judiciaries begin to resume normal operations, there is some debate about whether routine court conferences should occur in person in the new normal. Although court conferences may not need to occur in person as frequently as before the pandemic, eliminating in-person conferences may do damage to the judicial process for many reasons.

After a lawsuit is filed, courts often schedule regular conferences in order to set discovery deadlines, manage cases, and hear any grievances that might arise between the parties. In federal court, such conferences are often run by magistrate judges three or so times a year. In New York state court, such conferences may occur more frequently, and in New York City, there are usually massive compliance parts that are dedicated to handling such conferences.

When I was a “street lawyer” earlier in my career, I usually went to three or four court conferences a week. I really enjoyed traveling to different courthouses around New York City and interacting with the lawyers around me. Indeed, I made a lot of friends in the process, and every time I went to court, I struck up a conversation with someone who I had interacted with before, an experience I sorely miss as a result of the pandemic. In addition, when conferences were held by judges, I got a better sense of a judge’s personality, which could be helpful when advocating in front of that judge in the future.

Interacting with other lawyers and court officers face-to-face might make it easier to schedule matters, argue over issues, and conduct other operations that usually take place at court conferences. However, if we are being honest with ourselves, the nuts and bolts of many court conferences can be handled just fine virtually. It is easy enough to set deadlines, dates for depositions, and discuss other matters through Zoom or similar means and this does not need to occur in person.

Nevertheless, court conferences are invaluable in how they get lawyers in the same room to build relationships and connections with one another. The vast majority of lawsuits settle, and this is good for the judicial system. Courts could not handle the volume of litigation they would face if fewer cases resolved without judicial intervention, and this is why courts take extraordinary steps sometimes in order to promote settlements. It is much easier to talk about a case and settle a matter with someone if you have seen them face-to-face, interacted with them, and forged a connection with them. This is much more difficult to do over the phone or even by teleconferencing since nothing beats meeting adversaries and co-defendants’ counsel face-to-face at a court conference or at another setting.

Like many other litigators, I have not interacted face-to-face with any of my adversaries on lawsuits that were filed after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of course, I try to get by with speaking on the phone with my adversaries regularly, but I have a difficult time connecting with my adversaries on a personal level without meeting them in person, and I suspect others feel the same. I had a site inspection on one of my cases several weeks ago, and one of the biggest benefits was not the photographs and measurements that were taken but that I got to interact with my adversary for a short time. This connection could go a long way toward resolving our case.

I am not a psychologist, but it is clear that people have more empathy for individuals they have met than people with whom they have never interacted with in person. Many of my adversaries right now are simply names associated with the same professional headshot you see on almost every law firm website. This makes it more difficult to negotiate, find a common connection, and work toward resolving matters without seeking judicial intervention.

Sponsored

There are of course other benefits to in-person court conferences (including the fact that they are a good billing opportunity for lawyers) and courts have many reasons to seriously consider resuming in-person court conferences in some form as operations normalize. Of course, it might not make sense for all court conferences to be held in person since this often wastes time and resources, especially when court conferences usually only last for 10 minutes or so. However, courts should seriously consider resuming in-person court conferences at some level, not only because this can help with case management, but because this can build connections between adversaries that can be useful to resolving cases.

Jordan Rothman is a partner of The Rothman Law Firm, a full-service New York and New Jersey law firm. He is also the founder of Student Debt Diaries, a website discussing how he paid off his student loans. You can reach Jordan through email at jordan@rothmanlawyer.com.

Sponsored

Topics

, , , , ,