« Courts - "5th Circuit Rules That Changes in Debtor Income Should Be Addressed in Chapter 13 Bankruptcies" | Main | Environment - Great Lakes losing even more water via St. Clair River »

Saturday, July 25, 2009

Ind. Courts - Managing the electronic communication revolution in the Indiana courtroom

It began with stories of cell phones banned in the Allen County Courthouse. That was in November of 2006. Several other counties followed suit, via their local rules. You may find them in this list of ILB entries referencing "cell phones."

There were national stories of people using cellphones to photograph jurors, followed by stories of jurors using cellphones to tweet about the proceedings, or using home computers to conduct independent research. See this entry from July 2 headed "Tweeting, Texting, Googling Banned for Mich. Jurors."

In this comprehensive entry from July 4th, the ILB used as a springboard a story in the South Bend Tribune headed "St. Joseph County courtrooms will soon be outfitted with computers and Internet access, revolutionizing judges' access to information on the bench" to look at the question independent research by judges.

That leaves only the attorneys, but not for long.

This July 23rd article by Mark Hamblett appears in the New York Law Journal. Some quotes:

Attorneys are objecting to tougher rules for bringing laptop computers, cell phones and other electronic devices into Manhattan's Daniel Patrick Moynihan U.S. Courthouse.

Bar associations plan to ask Southern District federal judges next week to abandon an interim rule requiring a specific court order to bring specific computers, cell phones and other devices through entry security and into courtrooms. * * *

The July 29 hearing is set for 4 p.m. in Room 850 at 500 Pearl St. According to a court notice, the question is "on whether cell phones, PDAs, laptops, and other electronic devices should be permitted in the Courthouse; and if so, whether there should be any conditions or restrictions on their use?"

Judge Paul A. Crotty is accepting written comments until July 31 on the use of laptops and other electronic devices.

The Federal Bar Council, the New York County Lawyers' Association and the New York City Bar all are planning to weigh in on the policy changes.

Robert J. Giuffra Jr. of Sullivan & Cromwell, president of the Federal Bar Council, has submitted a letter to the court and is planning on speaking at the hearing. In his letter, he proposes extending Local Rule 1.8 to permit all lawyers to bring in electronic devices but subject to strict conditions.

Gregg H. Kanter of Fleming Zulack Williamson Zauderer serves on the NYCLA's Committee on Federal Courts and is helping to prepare a statement. He said yesterday there is a lot of opposition to the new policy.

"Everything I've seen in e-mails within NYCLA and outside of NYCLA -- everybody is against the current policy and would like to bring cell phones, laptops and BlackBerries into the courthouse" without having to seek specific authorization, Kanter said.

Crotty said the potential problem with freewheeling use of electronic devices was illustrated on June 29 during the sentencing of Bernard L. Madoff for a multibillion Ponzi scheme.

In the ceremonial courtroom on the ninth floor, U.S. marshals saw a woman holding up a device and trying to record the proceedings. The marshals seized the device and gave the woman a summons. Judge Denny Chin later issued an order that the recording of the sentencing be copied and preserved for the record, but that it be deleted from the device.

"This pointed out flaws in the system," Crotty said yesterday. "And there are still security concerns such as people photographing jurors or witnesses."

A bigger concern, the judge said, is that laptops "are relatively large packages that can contain explosives."

The court issued its interim order the same day as the Madoff sentencing, saying it was designed "to decrease congestion and the resulting delays in entering the Courthouse while the Court re-evaluates its policies regarding cell phones, laptops, PDAs and similar electronic devices."

Attorneys who regularly practice at the court made their displeasure known immediately and the bar groups went to work. But Crotty said the court is faced with security concerns it must address.

"What the bar has to appreciate is that we are just as sensitive as they are as to the convenience of electronic devices but the bar is singularly unsympathetic to our security concerns or the concerns of security committees," Crotty said.

More from the story:
Wendy H. Schwartz of Reed Smith plans to speak at the hearing next week as chair of the Federal Courts Committee for the New York City Bar.

"These types of devices are now so integral to the practice of law for attorneys both inside and outside the courthouse," she said. "They can make things go so much more smoothly."

Schwartz said she would also emphasize the need to "level the playing field" by allowing all lawyers to have the devices and that the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts has determined that electronic devices do not present a security issue. * * *

Kanter said the rule changes are a particular hindrance to solo and small-firm attorneys.

"It's a real burden on all attorneys, but especially attorneys with small firms," he said. "Sometimes, attorneys with small firms are in court all day and they need these devices -- and not just on client matters. We're talking about family emergencies and things like that."

Today the ILB received this tip:
Friday, an Indiana Supreme Court committee took up the issue of banning iPhones, cell phones, laptops, social network sites such as Twitter and Facebook, by jurors while they are deliberating a case.
I have been able to confirm that this was NOT the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure. A query for information was sent to the Court's public information officer earlier today. I expect to be posting more on this.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on July 25, 2009 06:27 PM
Posted to Courts in general | Indiana Courts