No one disagrees that everyone has the right to a speedy trial, but by its inherent nature, the wheels of justice do tend to turn rather slowly. And when you’re facing international litigation—the type which often requires plaintiff and defendant alike to cross one or more borders only to wait for a deposition or trial to take place on someone else’s notion of time—your costs can easily get out of control.

In an article published last Friday on Law.com, Daniel Wise of the New York Law Journal writes that the “Brooklyn Surrogate’s Court has conducted seven kinship hearings in the past two years with witnesses in distant locations, six of them abroad,” saving on international travel–by both a court staff lawyer and at least one other lawyer–by using videoconferencing.

From Law.com:

Brooklyn Surrogate Margarita López Torres, who…was elected in 2005, said she had pushed to “find more cost-effective ways” of conducting Surrogate’s Court functions “without jeopardizing quality.”

Yesterday’s hearing [sic: in Manhattan] involved claims being pressed by three maternal first cousins of Ethel Mudry, who died without a will in 2005, apparently without a living husband or children. With no other apparent heirs, the three cousins claim Ms. Mudry’s estate, valued at $270,000, should be distributed to them.

Three witnesses, including one of the cousins, testified during the hearing, which lasted more than 2 1/2 hours. Mr. Valentik, an old family friend, testified about Ms. Mudry’s family roots in Slovakia, which became a nation-state when the Republic of Czechoslovakia dissolved in 1989.

According to the article, the minimum cost of sending a Manhattan court attorney–and counsel for the public administrator–abroad is approximately $10,000, which is a fraction of what it costs to own or rent a videoconferencing system of your own for a year or more. With those types of costs, regardless of where you live, you shouldn’t be too surprised if your next deposition or sworn testimony is taken via videoconference.

Popularity: 43% [?]

There’s an interesting article in today’s Evening Telegram about the possibility of the New York State Legislature authorizing the use of videoconferencing in connection with local courtroom proceedings. The Herkimer (NY) County Legislature recently passed a resolution asking the State Legislature to allow what many states have already done… namely, to officially authorize the use of videoconferencing, as long as defendants do not object.

No one would deny that everyone has a right to a speedy trial, but by its nature, the wheels of justice do tend to turn very slowly. Part of the reason for this is that scheduling a trial and gathering all interested parties in a room is a huge challenge. Although videoconferencing may not guarantee justice, it can help those wheels turn a little more quickly.

Read “Legislature discusses videoconferencing technology” for a an overview of how and why the discussion is taking in place in New York.

Popularity: 80% [?]