Fed rules favor remote hearings

Law360 today has Joshua Sohn's Remote Hearings Should be the Default in Civil Litigation, in which he argues that "remote hearings save travel time and expense, which also improves attorney work-life balance and even reduces the carbon emissions that accompany jet travel." "Under the federal rules, there is a strong argument that courts should presumptively favor remote hearings that reduce travel costs, unless the court finds that an in-person hearing is necessary to do justice in the case before it."

Rule 78 empowers courts to adjudicate motions with or without hearings, which implies the corollary power to decide what type of hearing is most appropriate.

Rule 1 states that all the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure should be construed and administered "to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding."

Moreover, the 1993 advisory committee note to Rule 1 states that this rule "recognize[s] the affirmative duty of the court ... to ensure that civil litigation is resolved not only fairly, but also without undue cost or delay."

Most civil hearings are essentially an oral colloquy between the lawyers and the court. This sort of colloquy can be done equally well over a telephone or videoconference line as opposed to in person.

He concludes: "remote hearings should be the default in civil litigation, while in-person hearings need to justify their existence."