Existing law regulates the procedure of civil actions and permits a party who has provided notice to appear by telephone at specified conferences, hearings, and proceedings, in a general civil case, defined as all civil cases except probate, guardianship, conservatorship, juvenile, and family law proceedings.

This bill would permit a party who has provided notice to appear by electronic means that provide remote access to a conference, hearing, or proceeding in all civil cases, including probate, guardianship, conservatorship, juvenile, and family law proceedings. cases, as specified. The bill would require the Judicial Council to adopt rules and establish fees effectuating the policies and provisions made by this act no later than July 1, 2019, and would also make conforming changes to other provisions of law.

Existing law regulates the procedure of civil actions and permits a party who has provided notice to appear by telephone at specified conferences, hearings, and proceedings, in a general civil case, defined as all civil cases except probate, guardianship, conservatorship, juvenile, and family law proceedings.

This bill would permit a party who has provided notice to appear by electronic means that provide remote access to a conference, hearing, or proceeding in all civil cases, including probate, guardianship, conservatorship, juvenile, and family law proceedings. The bill would require the Judicial Council to adopt rules and establish fees effectuating the policies and provisions made by this act no later than July 1, 2019, and would also make conforming changes to other provisions of law.

 CONSENT  

Bill No: SB 467

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 7-0, 4/25/17

AYES: Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Hertzberg, Monning, Stern, Wieckowski

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Court Call LLC

DIGEST:

This bill permits a party, who has provided notice, to appear by electronic means in a court that provides for remote access to a conference, hearing, or proceeding, in the following civil cases: probate, guardianship, conservatorship, and family law proceedings. Electronic means currently includes telephone appearances; this bill expands it to include video teleconferencing, or other electronic means. Additionally, this bill requires the Judicial Council to adopt rules and establish fees effectuating the policies and provisions made by this act by no later than July 1, 2019, and makes conforming changes to other provisions of law.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Provides that it is the intent of Section 367.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure to promote uniformity in the procedures and practices relating to telephone appearances in civil cases. To improve access to courts and reduce litigation costs, courts should, to the extent feasible, permit parties to appear by telephone means at appropriate conferences, hearings, and proceedings in civil cases. (Civ. Code Sec. 367.5(a).)
2. Provides that in all general civil cases, as specified, a party who has provided notice may appear by telephone at the following conferences, hearings, and proceedings:
   1. a case management conference, provided the party has made a good faith effort to meet and confer before the conference as required by law and has timely served and filed a case management statement;
   2. a trial setting conference;
   3. a hearing on law and motion, except motions in limine;
   4. a hearing on a discovery motion;
   5. a conference to review the status of an arbitration or mediation;
   6. a hearing to review the dismissal of an action;
   7. any other hearing, conference, or proceeding if the court determines that a telephone appearance is appropriate. (Civ. Code Sec. 367.5(c).)
3. Provides that the court may require a party to appear in person at a hearing, conference, or proceeding listed above if the court determines on a hearing-by-hearing basis that a personal appearance would materially assist in the determination of the proceedings or in the effective management or resolution of the particular case. (Civ. Code Sec. 367.5(c).)
4. Provides for the Judicial Council to adopt rules effectuating the policies and provisions related to telephone appearances for the hearings, conferences, and proceedings listed above. The rules may prescribe, but are not limited to prescribing, the notice to be given by a party requesting a telephone appearance, the manner in which the telephone appearances are to be conducted, the conditions required for a party to be permitted to appear by telephone means, and provisions relating to the courts’ use of private vendors to provide telephone services. (Civ. Code Sec. 367.5(d).)
5. Provides for the Judicial Council to provide for the procedures and practices, and for the administration of, telephone appearances for all types, cases, and matters not specified above. For these other cases and matters, the Judicial Council may specify the types of cases and matters in which parties may appear by telephone, the types of cases, and matters in which parties shall appear personally, the conditions under which a party may be permitted to appear by telephone, and any other rules governing telephone and personal appearances that are within its rulemaking authority. (Civ. Code Sec. 367.5(e).)
6. Establishes a framework for the fees to be charged related to telephonic appearances and provides for the Judicial Council to establish statewide, uniform fees to be paid by a party for appearing by telephone. (Civ. Code Sec. 367.6.)
7. Provides for the Judicial Council to enter into one or more master agreements with vendors providing for telephonic appearances, and establishes some of the terms of these agreements. (Gov. Code Sec. 72010.)
8. Provides for a court to make telephonic appearances available to a party only through one or more of the following methods:
   1. an agreement with one or more of the vendors under the master agreements as provided;
   2. an agreement entered into between a court and a vendor prior to July 1, 2011, and which has not expired; or
   3. direct provision by the court of a telephone appearance services to a party pursuant to Section 367.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Gov. Code Sec. 72010(c).)
9. Requires courts that chose to provide telephonic appearance services directly to collect the fees adopted by the Judicial Council for the provision of these services. A judicial officer has the discretion to waive fees for parties appearing in by telephonic means in their courtroom. (Gov. Code Sec. 72010(c)(3).)
10. Provides for $20 of each fee received for telephonic appearances to be deposited in the Trial Court Trust Fund by the vendor or court that provides for the telephonic appearances. This section additionally provides for vendors to transmit an amount equal to the total amount of revenue received by all courts from all vendors for providing telephonic appearances for the 2009-2010 fiscal year. This amount shall be apportioned by the Judicial Council to the vendors with which the Judicial Council has a master agreement and shall be allocated for the purpose of preventing significant disruption in services in courts that previously received revenues from vendors for providing telephonic appearance services. (Gov. Code Sec. 72011.)

Existing Rules of Court:

1. Defines “general civil case” to mean all civil cases except probate, guardianship, conservatorship, juvenile, and family law proceedings, small claims proceedings, unlawful detainer proceedings, and other “civil petitions” described as specified. (California Rules of Court, Rule 1.6(4).)
2. Allows the court, in its discretion, to permit a telephone appearance in any hearing or conference related to an action for child support when the local child support agency is providing services under title IV-D of the Social Security Act. (California Rules of Court, Rule 5.324(c).)
3. Provides that an applicant for an ex parte order may appear either in person or by telephone. (California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1207.)
4. Provides that parties may appear by telephone at appropriate conferences, hearings, and proceedings in civil cases. This rule applies to all general civil cases as defined in rule 1.6 and to unlawful detainer and probate proceedings. (California Rules of Court, Rule 3.670(a)-(b).)
5. Provides for the following hearings, conferences, and proceedings to require personal appearance:
   1. trials, hearings, and proceedings at which witnesses are expected to testify;
   2. hearings on temporary restraining orders;
   3. settlement conferences;
   4. trial management conferences;
   5. hearings on motions in limine; and
   6. hearings on petitions to confirm the sale of property under the Probate Code. (California Rules of Court, Rule 3.670(e).)

This bill:

1. Extends appearances by electronic means at all civil cases, including probate, guardianship, conservatorship, and family law proceedings, with the exception of juvenile proceedings.
2. Allows for appearances to be made by electronic means in civil cases, including telephone, video teleconferencing, or other electronic means that provide remote access to a conference, hearing, or proceeding where telephone appearances are currently allowed, thus expanding beyond telephone conferences.
3. Requires the Judicial Council to adopt rules effectuating the policies and provisions related to an appearance by electronic means in all civil cases, by July 1, 2019.
4. Requires the Judicial Council to establish statewide, uniform fees for electronic appearances on or before July 1, 2019.

Comments

Purpose of the bill. Current law is needlessly restrictive in both its scope of applicability and in the types of remote communication technology allowed. SB 467 broadens the technology which may be employed in remote appearances beyond telephones: the bill adds audiovisual, videoconferencing, digital or other electronic means of appearing remotely, as the technology is moving beyond the telephone. SB 467 also broadens the case types eligible for remote appearances beyond general civil cases to include family, probate, mental health, Title IV-D child support, juvenile dependency and delinquency, and Family Code Section 3012 mandatory child custody mediation proceedings.

Broadening the category of civil cases included. When the Senate Judiciary Committee analyzed SB 315 (Lieu, 2013), which in its original form would have expanded the electronic appearances to all general civil case conferences, hearings, or proceedings except for a trial or trial readiness conferences, the Committee noted the bill would not expand the type of case beyond that included in the “general civil case” definition. Therefore, it would not have included cases relating to guardianship, probate, conservatorship, juvenile, or family law proceedings. In reference to the continued exclusion of these cases, the Committee’s analysis stated “[a]rguably there are special considerations in such cases that would generally justify personal appearances.”

California Rules of Court seem to have extended beyond the general civil case, allowing remote appearances on probate cases and Title IV-D Child Support cases. In some instances, a probate case may also involve guardianship or conservatorship issues. It appears that in probate cases and in some instances where a guardianship or conservatorship is involved, telephonic appearances have already been allowed under the California Rules of Court. Additionally, California Rule of Court 5.9 allows for a party in a family law case to appear by telephone at a hearing, conference, or proceeding if the court determines that a telephone appearance is appropriate. However, there is nothing in the California Rules of Court that suggests juvenile cases involve telephonic appearances. Typically, most juvenile delinquency proceedings and all dependency cases are confidential. In accordance with Welfare and Institutions Code Sections 345 and 675, California Rules of Court provide that all juvenile court proceedings must be heard at a special or separate session of the court, and no other matter may be heard in that session. No person on trial, awaiting trial, or accused of a crime, other than a parent, de facto parent, guardian, or relative of the child, may be present at the hearing, except while testifying as a witness. (California Rules of Court 5.530.) Allowing remote appearances in these cases may, arguably, violate this confidentiality, as there would be no way to ensure the person making the remote appearance did so in a way that preserves the confidentiality of a closed court room.

To protect these potential privacy concerns and reflect existing practices established by the California Rules of Court, this bill was amended in the Senate Judiciary Committee to remove juvenile court proceedings.

Preserving court discretion. This bill expands the types of technologies available for remote appearances, moving beyond just the telephone to include all other electronic means. This expansion includes videoconferencing and other commonly used audiovisual technologies, but does not limit these electronic appearances to those listed. With the rapidly advancing state of technological communications, it arguably makes sense to not limit methods for remote appearances to those commonly known or popular at this time. Rather, this bill provides for appearances made by any electronic means, and relies on other aspects of this statutory scheme to govern technologies that are used in California’s civil courts.

Presumably, the Judicial Council will provide additional guidance as to the types of technologies used in California’s courts for remote appearance purposes consistent with their rulemaking authority. This complies with existing code provisions requiring the Judicial Council to adopt rules effectuating the policies and provisions related to remote appearances. Additionally, under Government Code Section 72010, the Judicial Council is responsible for entering into master agreements with vendors regarding the technologies to be used for these remote appearances, currently limited to telephonic appearances under the statute. They will thus be responsible for limiting the types of technologies used by courts for remote appearances to those provided for in these master agreements.

Existing law, Government Code Section 72010, does allow for a court to directly provide the technologies used for remote appearances. Therefore, if a court wishes to use a technology not covered by one of Judicial Council’s master agreements; they may seek to directly provide an alternative technology. However, as currently written, this statute does not allow them to enter into their own vendor contracts. Rather, they will be responsible for directly providing the means for which the electronic appearance was made possible.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

SUPPORT: (Verified 5/15/17)

Court Call LLC (source)

OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/15/17)

None received

Prepared by:

5/17/17 16:58:14

**** END ****

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair

2017-2018 Regular Session

Bill No: SB 467 (Author:Wilk)

Version: February 16, 2017

Hearing Date: April 25, 2017

Fiscal: Yes

Urgency: No

Consultant: MS

SUBJECT

Civil actions: appearance by electronic means

DESCRIPTION

This bill would permit a party, who has provided notice, to appear by electronic means in a court that provides for remote access to a conference, hearing, or proceeding, in all civil cases, including probate, guardianship, conservatorship, juvenile, and family law proceedings. Electronic means currently includes telephone appearances; this bill would expand it to include video teleconferencing, or other electronic means. Additionally, this bill would require the Judicial Council to adopt rules and establish fees effectuating the policies and provisions made by this act by no later than July 1, 2019, and would make conforming changes to other provisions of law.

BACKGROUND

In 2007, AB 500 (Lieu, Ch. 268, Stats. 2007) permitted a party in a general civil case to appear by telephone at specified conferences, hearings, and proceedings if proper notice was provided. AB 500 essentially set up the statutory scheme we have now regarding telephonic appearances in specified conferences, hearings, and proceedings for general civil cases, including the provision for judicial discretion allowing the court to require a party to appear in person at any of these hearings, conferences, or proceedings. Prior to this, California Rules of Court allowed for parties to appear by telephone in any conference or hearing at which witnesses are not expected to be called, and required the Judicial Council to adopt standards regarding judicial administration of these appearances. These rules allowed for telephonic appearances in California since 1987. The sponsor of AB 500, the Consumer Attorneys of California, believed legislation was necessary because there was no consistent implementation of the existing rule of court.

SB 315 (Lieu, 2013), which was gut and amended, would have provided for this statutory scheme to apply to any conference, hearing, or proceeding for a general civil case, except a trial or trial readiness conference. This would have replaced the list of conferences, hearings, and proceedings provided for in current law, but would not have impacted the ability of the court to require a party to appear on hearing-to-hearing bases. Again, the concern from the sponsors seemed to be that despite the existing statutes, courts were not consistently implementing the use of telephonic appearances. Rather, some courts seemed “hesitant [to] tak[e] full advantage of telephonic appearances.” (Senate Judiciary Committee, Analysis SB 315 (Lieu), 2013.) They felt expanding the types of appearances allowed under statute would have cut down on valuable court and lawyer time. This bill was gutted and amended in the Assembly, changing its focus to the Contractors’ State License Law. The proposed changes to telephonic appearances were never made.

In 2011, the Judicial Council entered into a master agreement with Court Call, LLC for the provision of telephonic appearances throughout California as allowed under Government Code Section 72010. Prior to this master agreement, Court Call, LLC had been the vendor for telephonic appearances for almost all of California’s courts and provided revenues from the use of their services to some courts per individual agreements. In 2010, SB 857 (Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Ch. 720, Stats. 2010) added Government Code Section 72010 and 72011, allowing the Judicial Council to enter into master agreements with vendors for telephonic appearances and provided for the allocation of a $20 surcharge on telephonic appearance fees to the Trial Court Trust Fund. Additionally, Section 72011 provided for the vendors to remit annually an amount equal to the funds provided to local courts by telephonic appearance vendors prior to the creation of Section 72011. SB 857 additionally added Code of Civil Procedure Section 367.6, allowing the Judicial Council to establish a statewide, uniform fee to be paid by a party appearing by telephonic means.

This bill would expand the existing statutory scheme for telephone appearances to appearances by electronic means, which would include telephone, video teleconferencing, and other electronic means. Additionally, it would expand the type of conferences, hearings, and proceedings to include probate, guardianship, conservatorship, juvenile, and family law proceedings. The Judicial Council would be responsible for establishing statewide, uniform fees for appearances by electronic means by a provided for deadline.

CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW

Existing law provides that it is the intent of Section 367.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure to promote uniformity in the procedures and practices relating to telephone appearances in civil cases. To improve access to courts and reduce litigation costs, courts should, to the extent feasible, permit parties to appear by telephone means at appropriate conferences, hearings, and proceedings in civil cases. (Civ. Code Sec. 367.5(a).)

Existing law provides that in all general civil cases, as specified, a party who has provided notice may appear by telephone at the following conferences, hearings, and proceedings:

• a case management conference, provided the party has made a good faith effort to meet and confer before the conference as required by law and has timely served and filed a case management statement;
• a trial setting conference;
• a hearing on law and motion, except motions in limine;
• a hearing on a discovery motion;
• a conference to review the status of an arbitration or mediation;
• a hearing to review the dismissal of an action;
• any other hearing, conference, or proceeding if the court determines that a telephone appearance is appropriate. (Civ. Code Sec. 367.5(c).)

Existing Rule of Court defines “general civil case” to mean all civil cases except probate, guardianship, conservatorship, juvenile, and family law proceedings, small claims proceedings, unlawful detainer proceedings, and other “civil petitions” described as specified. (California Rules of Court, Rule 1.6(4).)

Existing Rule of Court allows the court, in its discretion, to permit a telephone appearance in any hearing or conference related to an action for child support when the local child support agency is providing services under title IV-D of the Social Security Act. (California Rules of Court, Rule 5.324(c).)

Existing Rule of Court provides that an applicant for an ex parte order may appear either in person or by telephone. (California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1207.)

Existing Rule of Court provides that parties may appear by telephone at appropriate conferences, hearings, and proceedings in civil cases. This rule applies to all general civil cases as defined in rule 1.6 and to unlawful detainer and probate proceedings. (California Rules of Court, Rule 3.670(a)-(b).)

Existing Rule of Court provides for the following hearings, conferences, and proceedings to require personal appearance:

• trials, hearings, and proceedings at which witnesses are expected to testify;
• hearings on temporary restraining orders;
• settlement conferences;
• trial management conferences;
• hearings on motions in limine; and
• hearings on petitions to confirm the sale of property under the Probate Code. (California Rules of Court, Rule 3.670(e).)

Existing Rule of Court provides that a party may appear by telephone at a hearing, conference, or proceeding related to all family law cases, except for action for child support involving a local child support agency, if the court determines that a telephone appearance is appropriate. (California Rules of Court, Rule 5.9(b).)

This bill would extend appearances by electronic means at all civil cases, including probate, guardianship, conservatorship, juvenile, and family law proceedings.

Existing law provides that the court may require a party to appear in person at a hearing, conference, or proceeding listed above if the court determines on a hearing-by-hearing basis that a personal appearance would materially assist in the determination of the proceedings or in the effective management or resolution of the particular case. (Civ. Code Sec. 367.5(c).)

Existing law provides for the Judicial Council to adopt rules effectuating the policies and provisions related to telephone appearances for the hearings, conferences, and proceedings listed above. The rules may prescribe, but are not limited to prescribing, the notice to be given by a party requesting a telephone appearance, the manner in which the telephone appearances are to be conducted, the conditions required for a party to be permitted to appear by telephone means, and provisions relating to the courts’ use of private vendors to provide telephone services. (Civ. Code Sec. 367.5(d).)

Existing law provides for the Judicial Council to provide for the procedures and practices, and for the administration of, telephone appearances for all types, cases, and matters not specified above. For these other cases and matters, the Judicial Council may specify the types of cases and matters in which parties may appear by telephone, the types of cases, and matters in which parties shall appear personally, the conditions under which a party may be permitted to appear by telephone, and any other rules governing telephone and personal appearances that are within its rulemaking authority. (Civ. Code Sec. 367.5(e).)

Existing law establishes a framework for the fees to be charged related to telephonic appearances and provides for the Judicial Council to establish statewide, uniform fees to be paid by a party for appearing by telephone. (Civ. Code Sec. 367.6.)

Existing law provides for the Judicial Council to enter into one or more master agreements with vendors providing for telephonic appearances, and establishes some of the terms of these agreements. (Gov. Code Sec. 72010.)

Existing law provides for a court to make telephonic appearances available to a party only through one or more of the following methods:

• an agreement with one or more of the vendors under the master agreements as provided;
• an agreement entered into between a court and a vendor prior to July 1, 2011, and which has not expired; or
• direct provision by the court of a telephone appearance services to a party pursuant to Section 367.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Gov. Code Sec. 72010(c).)

Existing law requires courts that chose to provide telephonic appearance services directly to collect the fees adopted by the Judicial Council for the provision of these services. A judicial officer has the discretion to waive fees for parties appearing in by telephonic means in their courtroom. (Gov. Code Sec. 72010(c)(3).)

Existing law provides for $20 of each fee received for telephonic appearances to be deposited in the Trial Court Trust Fund by the vendor or court that provides for the telephonic appearances. This section additionally provides for vendors to transmit an amount equal to the total amount of revenue received by all courts from all vendors for providing telephonic appearances for the 2009-2010 fiscal year. This amount shall be apportioned by the Judicial Council to the vendors with which the Judicial Council has a master agreement and shall be allocated for the purpose of preventing significant disruption in services in courts that previously received revenues from vendors for providing telephonic appearance services. (Gov. Code Sec. 72011.)

This bill would allow for appearances to be made by electronic means in civil cases, including telephone, video teleconferencing, or other electronic means that provide remote access to a conference, hearing, or proceeding where telephone appearances are currently allowed, thus expanding beyond telephone conferences.

This bill would require the Judicial Council to adopt rules effectuating the policies and provisions related to an appearance by electronic means in all civil cases, by July 1, 2019.

This bill would require the Judicial Council to establish statewide, uniform fees for electronic appearances on or before July 1, 2019.

This bill would make conforming changes by replacing references to “telephone appearance” with “appearances made by electronic means” in all appropriate code sections.

COMMENT

1. Stated need for this bill

According to the Author:

Current law is needlessly restrictive in both its scope of applicability and in the types of remote communication technology allowed. SB 467 broadens the technology which may be employed in remote appearances beyond telephones: the bill adds audiovisual, videoconferencing, digital or other electronic means of appearing remotely, as the technology is moving beyond the telephone. SB 467 also broadens the case types eligible for remote appearances beyond general civil cases to include family, probate, mental health, Title IV-D child support, juvenile dependency and delinquency, and Family Code Section 3012 mandatory child custody mediation proceedings.

1. This bill broadens the category of civil cases to include those which may be considered more sensitive

When this Committee analyzed SB 315 (Lieu, 2013), which in its original form would have expanded the electronic appearances to all general civil case conferences, hearings, or proceedings except for a trial or trial readiness conference, this Committee noted the bill would not expand the type of case beyond that included in the “general civil case” definition. Therefore, it would not have included cases relating to guardianship, probate, conservatorship, juvenile, or family law proceedings. In reference to the continued exclusion of these cases, this Committee’s analysis stated “[a]rguably there are special considerations in such cases that would generally justify personal appearances.”

California Rules of Court seem to have extended beyond the general civil case, allowing remote appearances on probate cases and Title IV-D Child Support cases. In some instances, a probate case may also involve guardianship or conservatorship issues. It appears that in probate cases and in some instances where a guardianship or conservatorship is involved, telephonic appearances have already been allowed under the California Rules of Court. Additionally, California Rule of Court 5.9 allows for a party in a family law case to appear by telephone at a hearing, conference, or proceeding if the court determines that a telephone appearance is appropriate. However, there is nothing in the California Rules of Court that suggests juvenile cases involve telephonic appearances. Typically, most juvenile delinquency proceedings and all dependency cases are confidential. In accordance with Welfare and Institutions Code Sections 345 and 675, California Rules of Court provide that all juvenile court proceedings must be heard at a special or separate session of the court, and no other matter may be heard in that session. No person on trial, awaiting trial, or accused of a crime, other than a parent, de facto parent, guardian, or relative of the child, may be present at the hearing, except while testifying as a witness. (California Rules of Court 5.530.) Allowing remote appearances in these cases may, arguably, violate this confidentiality, as there would be no way to ensure the person making the remote appearance did so in a way that preserves the confidentiality of a closed court room.

To protect these potential privacy concerns and reflect existing practices established by the California Rules of Court, the Committee suggests the following amendments.

Proposed amendments:

On page 2, line 10, strike “juvenile,”

On page 2, line 13, strike “juvenile,”

1. This bill would preserve court discretion while allowing the remote appearances to catch up with technological advances

This bill would expand the types of technologies available for remote appearances, moving beyond just the telephone to include all other electronic means. This expansion would include videoconferencing and other commonly used audiovisual technologies, but would not limit these electronic appearances to those listed. With the rapidly advancing state of technological communications, it arguably makes sense to not limit methods for remote appearances to those commonly known or popular at this time. Rather, this bill provides for appearances made by any electronic means, and would rely on other aspects of this statutory scheme to govern technologies that are used in California’s civil courts.

Presumably, the Judicial Council would provide additional guidance as to the types of technologies used in California’s courts for remote appearance purposes consistent with their rulemaking authority. This would comply with existing code provisions requiring the Judicial Council to adopt rules effectuating the policies and provisions related to remote appearances. Additionally, under Government Code Section 72010, the Judicial Council is responsible for entering into master agreements with vendors regarding the technologies to be used for these remote appearances, currently limited to telephonic appearances under the statute. They would thus be responsible for limiting the types of technologies used by courts for remote appearances to those provided for in these master agreements.

Existing law, Government Code Section 72010, does allow for a court to directly provide the technologies used for remote appearances. Thus, should a court wish to use a technology not covered by one of Judicial Council’s master agreements; they may seek to directly provide an alternative technology. However, as currently written, this statute would not allow them to enter into their own vendor contracts. Rather, they would be responsible for directly providing the means for which the electronic appearance was made possible.

1. Potential concerns regarding lack of uniformity

As the technologies available for remote appearances grow, there may be some concerns that a lack of uniformity will result in terms of what technologies are available at each courthouse. As discussed above, when the use of telephonic appearances for these general civil case conferences, hearings, and proceedings was codified, the sponsor argued this change was necessary for increased uniformity. (See Background.) However, uniformity has never been the result of this codification, as judicial discretion has always allowed courts to implement these appearances as their judges see fit.

Additionally, under these existing laws, the Superior Courts of El Dorado and Placer Counties have begun directly providing for telephonic appearances. They acquired and implemented their own means for these appearances rather than rely on the terms of Judicial Council’s master agreement with Court Call, LLC. This means lawyers who practice in El Dorado or Placer County might experience different telephonic appearance technology than those available in Sacramento County.

Moreover, the Author’s office reports that a limited number of California courtrooms were recently equipped with technology that enables audio-visual appearances in civil cases. In addition, a pilot project occurring in the Fresno Superior Court allows the Fresno Superior Court to conduct traffic cases remotely. This was implemented following the closure of a number of Fresno County’s courthouses and relocation of their court services to the metropolitan Fresno area. These existing differences suggest uniformity between the superior courts in terms of remote appearances has never fully existed.

Support: None Known

Opposition: None Known

HISTORY

Source: Court Call LLC.

Related Pending Legislation: None Known

Prior Legislation:

SB 857 (Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Ch. 720, Stats. 2010) See background.

SB 315 (Lieu, 2013) See background.

AB 500 (Lieu, Ch. 268, Stats. 2007) See background.

**************