Rep. Brian Stewart, R-Ashland. Photo from the Ohio House.
The COVID-19 pandemic spurred the adoption of remote conferencing, and whether you appreciate working in sweatpants and slippers, or the thought of back-to-back Zoom meetings makes you break out in a cold sweat, those technologies aren’t soon going away. Still, state lawmakers want to draw some bright lines around when video conferencing is and isn’t appropriate.
Rep. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, has zeroed in on a new rule proposed by the Ohio Supreme Court allowing civil trials to be held remotely.
“This rule would allow for the court to order a trial by Zoom at the request of one party over the objections of the other party, would allow the parties, the attorneys, the witnesses, to all appear remotely,” Stewart argued. “And if both parties agree to it, the court could even allow the jury itself to participate remotely.”
The proposed changes are part of an annual package of amendments to court procedure. Throughout, the Commission on the Rules of Practice and Procedure offer opportunities for courts to use remote technology in an effort to streamline and modernize operations. A single party to a civil case may request a remote trial “in whole or in part” according to the rules, but it’s left to the judge’s discretion whether to approve that request.
To invalidate those rules, lawmakers have to pass a concurrent resolution. Stewart has picked up more than 20 co-sponsors for his since filing it last week. Attorney General Dave Yost voiced his support for Stewart’s idea on Twitter last week, too.
“Any lawyer willing to reduce the jury box to a two-dimensional screen, in my opinion, is committing malpractice,” Yost argued.
Being able to see, hear and otherwise sense living, breathing jurors and their reactions is a critical part of trying a case.
Any lawyer willing to reduce the jury box to a two-dimensional screen, in my opinion, is committing malpractice.
Thanks for leading, @BrianStewartOH ! https://t.co/DTp0VRfOO3
— Attorney General Dave Yost (@DaveYostOH) May 12, 2022
Stewart doesn’t take issue with changes on the criminal side, where courts will be able to conduct testimony and arraignments remotely. Those proposals include a note encouraging judges consider a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to confront their accusers before they go forward with remote testimony. Defendants will also be able to waive their right to appear in person if they choose.
While Stewart is quick to point out the efficiencies promised by new technology aren’t always what they’re cracked up to be — “Your Honor, I am not a cat, right?” he said — his biggest qualm is with juries participating remotely. He argued if that change isn’t on the table for criminal cases, it shouldn’t be for civil cases either.
“The jury needs to be able to observe everyone, right?” Stewart said. “Being able to observe how the parties react to a witness’s testimony, observing a witness in person.”
“We’re talking about sometimes hundreds and hundreds of pages of exhibits and financial records,” he added. “To think that we’re going to have a jury that could be as engaged over a computer monitor, as they would be in person, I think there’s just studies to show us that’s not the case.”
House leaders referred Stewart’s concurrent resolution to the Civil Justice committee, Tuesday. Lawmakers need to pass the measure before July 1 if they want to keep the rule changes from taking effect.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
▪ You must give Ohio Capital Journal credit, including https://ohiocapitaljournal.com and author.
▪ If you publish online, include the links from the story, and a link to Ohio Capital Journal.
▪ Stories may be edited for in-house style or to shorten. More substantial changes should be noted as additional and conducted by your publication.
▪ You can publish our graphics and any photos that are credited to Ohio Capital Journal with the stories with which they originally appeared. For any other uses, you must seek permission from us at [email protected]
▪ If you share the story on social media, please mention @OhioCapJournal on Twitter and ohiocapitaljournal on Facebook.
▪ Don’t sell ads against the story. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page with ads you’ve already sold.
▪ Content should not be published behind a paywall; please reach out to the editor-in-chief if you have questions about your particular paywall system.
by Nick Evans, Ohio Capital Journal May 18, 2022
The COVID-19 pandemic spurred the adoption of remote conferencing, and whether you appreciate working in sweatpants and slippers, or the thought of back-to-back Zoom meetings makes you break out in a cold sweat, those technologies aren’t soon going away. Still, state lawmakers want to draw some bright lines around when video conferencing is and isn’t appropriate.
Rep. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, has zeroed in on a new rule proposed by the Ohio Supreme Court allowing civil trials to be held remotely.
“This rule would allow for the court to order a trial by Zoom at the request of one party over the objections of the other party, would allow the parties, the attorneys, the witnesses, to all appear remotely,” Stewart argued. “And if both parties agree to it, the court could even allow the jury itself to participate remotely.”
The proposed changes are part of an annual package of amendments to court procedure. Throughout, the Commission on the Rules of Practice and Procedure offer opportunities for courts to use remote technology in an effort to streamline and modernize operations. A single party to a civil case may request a remote trial “in whole or in part” according to the rules, but it’s left to the judge’s discretion whether to approve that request.
To invalidate those rules, lawmakers have to pass a concurrent resolution. Stewart has picked up more than 20 co-sponsors for his since filing it last week. Attorney General Dave Yost voiced his support for Stewart’s idea on Twitter last week, too.
“Any lawyer willing to reduce the jury box to a two-dimensional screen, in my opinion, is committing malpractice,” Yost argued.
Being able to see, hear and otherwise sense living, breathing jurors and their reactions is a critical part of trying a case.
Any lawyer willing to reduce the jury box to a two-dimensional screen, in my opinion, is committing malpractice.
Thanks for leading, @BrianStewartOH ! https://t.co/DTp0VRfOO3
— Attorney General Dave Yost (@DaveYostOH) May 12, 2022
Stewart doesn’t take issue with changes on the criminal side, where courts will be able to conduct testimony and arraignments remotely. Those proposals include a note encouraging judges consider a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to confront their accusers before they go forward with remote testimony. Defendants will also be able to waive their right to appear in person if they choose.
While Stewart is quick to point out the efficiencies promised by new technology aren’t always what they’re cracked up to be — “Your Honor, I am not a cat, right?” he said — his biggest qualm is with juries participating remotely. He argued if that change isn’t on the table for criminal cases, it shouldn’t be for civil cases either.
“The jury needs to be able to observe everyone, right?” Stewart said. “Being able to observe how the parties react to a witness’s testimony, observing a witness in person.”
“We’re talking about sometimes hundreds and hundreds of pages of exhibits and financial records,” he added. “To think that we’re going to have a jury that could be as engaged over a computer monitor, as they would be in person, I think there’s just studies to show us that’s not the case.”
House leaders referred Stewart’s concurrent resolution to the Civil Justice committee, Tuesday. Lawmakers need to pass the measure before July 1 if they want to keep the rule changes from taking effect.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David DeWitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and Twitter.
Our stories may be republished online or in print under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. We ask that you edit only for style or to shorten, provide proper attribution and link to our web site. Please see our republishing guidelines for use of photos and graphics.
Nick Evans has spent the past seven years reporting for NPR member stations in Florida and Ohio. He got his start in Tallahassee, covering issues like redistricting, same sex marriage and medical marijuana. Since arriving in Columbus in 2018, he has covered everything from city council to football. His work on Ohio politics and local policing have been featured numerous times on NPR.
The Ohio Capital Journal is an independent, nonprofit news organization dedicated to connecting Ohioans to their state government and its impact on their lives. The Capital Journal combines Ohio state government coverage with incisive investigative journalism, reporting on the consequences of policy, political insight and principled commentary.
DEIJ Policy | Ethics Policy | Privacy Policy
Our stories may be republished online or in print under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. We ask that you edit only for style or to shorten, provide proper attribution and link to our web site.