Appearing Remotely, and What It Requires
Remote hearings removed the travel and added a list of things that can go wrong on the morning. Most of them are arranged the week before, and the ones that are not tend to produce an absence rather than an inconvenience.
The rule in short
Attending a hearing remotely usually requires permission, which is granted routinely for some hearing types and reluctantly for others. Beyond permission, it requires a tested connection, the documents available in a usable form, an appropriate environment, and a plan for what happens if the link fails. None of that arranges itself on the day.
Remote attendance is now ordinary, which has made the preparation for it invisible. It still has to happen, and it still has to happen before the morning of the hearing.
Getting permission
Ask early. Requests made close to the hearing are harder to accommodate because the arrangements themselves take time.
Say why. Distance, cost, health, caring responsibilities and the nature of the hearing all feature, and specificity helps.
Identify who is appearing remotely. A representative alone, a party, a witness or everybody, since the answer differs by role.
Check the default position. Some hearing types are remote by default and others are not, and assumptions in either direction cause problems.
Expect resistance for some hearings. Contested evidential hearings and final hearings attract more scrutiny than directions appointments.
Ask the other parties. Their position is usually sought and is easier to obtain in advance.
Confirm the platform. Which system is used, and whether any software or account is required.
Get the joining details in writing. And check them the day before rather than the hour before.
Do not assume a previous permission carries. Permission granted for one hearing rarely extends to the next one automatically.
Confirm it in the diary entry. Along with the platform and the joining details, so that whoever attends is not searching for them, per how much notice of a hearing is required.
What to arrange in advance
Test the connection. On the actual device, with the actual software, from the actual location, rather than assuming it works.
Test the audio and video. Sound is what causes hearings to be halted, and a headset is usually better than a laptop microphone.
Arrange a stable network. Wired where possible, and with a mobile connection available as a fallback.
Prepare the documents. Available in a usable form, since scrolling through an unindexed file during a hearing is unmanageable.
Have a paper set if possible. Which frequently works better than a second screen for anything requiring cross-reference.
Confirm the environment. A quiet room, a plain background, controlled interruptions and adequate light.
Tell everybody in the building. Interruptions during a hearing are avoidable and reflect on the person appearing.
Charge everything. Devices, headsets and any backup, because a hearing outlasts an unplugged laptop.
Plan for a witness appearing separately. Their arrangements are their own and need confirming, per what the record of a hearing shows.
| Hearing type | Remote usually available | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Directions appointment | Yes | Frequently the default |
| Short application | Yes | Routine |
| Contested evidence | Sometimes | Scrutinized |
| Final hearing | Less often | Attendance presumed |
| Witness testimony | Varies | Own arrangements |
On the day
Join early. Fifteen minutes before, because connection problems discovered at the start time are already a difficulty.
Confirm the audio with somebody. Before the hearing starts rather than during the first exchange.
Have the joining details to hand. In case a reconnection is needed and the original message is buried.
Keep a telephone number available. Many systems provide dial-in access as a fallback, and it should be written down.
Mute appropriately. And remember to unmute, which is the most common and most avoidable interruption.
Address the forum properly. Remote attendance does not change the conventions of how a hearing is conducted.
Do not multitask. It is entirely visible to everybody else, and it is noticed.
Keep the client reachable. A party joining separately from their representative cannot ask a quick question, so a parallel channel should be agreed beforehand.
Speak more deliberately. Latency makes overlapping speech unintelligible, and pauses help everybody.
Take notes as usual. A record of what happened is as necessary remotely as it is in person.
Connections tested on a different device, in a different location, on a different day prove nothing about the morning of the hearing. The test that matters replicates the conditions exactly, and it takes ten minutes.
When something fails
Say so immediately. A participant who has lost audio and says nothing appears to be unresponsive rather than disconnected.
Use the fallback. Dial-in numbers, a second device or a mobile connection, tried in a planned order rather than improvised.
Contact the forum directly. By telephone or email, using details obtained in advance for exactly this situation.
Ask for a short pause. Which is granted routinely where a genuine technical problem is reported promptly.
Do not simply leave. Disappearing from a hearing without explanation is treated very differently from reporting a failure.
Record what happened. Times, the nature of the problem and what was done, in case it becomes relevant.
Ask about anything missed. Where part of a hearing proceeded without the party hearing it, that should be raised at once.
Consider an application. Where a substantial part was missed, the point may need to be taken formally.
Follow up in writing. A short note recording the difficulty protects the position if the outcome is challenged later.
Ask for the record. Where a hearing is recorded or transcribed, obtaining it settles what was said during the period that was missed, per what the record of a hearing shows.
When remote attendance is not appropriate
Contested evidence. Assessing a witness remotely is possible and is treated as less satisfactory in many systems.
Final hearings. Which frequently attract a presumption of attendance in person.
Where documents are voluminous. Handling a large bundle remotely is difficult for everybody involved.
Where the party needs support. Interpreters, intermediaries and supporters frequently work considerably better in person, per arranging an interpreter in time.
Where the connection is unreliable. A party who cannot maintain a link is better served attending.
Where the environment cannot be controlled. Appearing from a workplace or a shared space rarely goes well.
Where the party would be disadvantaged. Remote attendance against an opponent present in the room is not always neutral.
Where the forum prefers otherwise. The decision is theirs and the reasons are frequently practical.
Where it is genuinely easier to attend. The convenience of remote attendance is not always as large as it appears.
Remote attendance usually requires permission, granted readily for procedural hearings and more cautiously for contested evidence and final hearings.
Beyond permission it requires arrangement: a tested connection on the actual device and location, working audio, documents in a usable form and a controlled environment.
On the day, joining early, confirming audio, keeping the joining details and a dial-in number to hand and speaking deliberately are what make it work.
When something fails, reporting it immediately, using a planned fallback and contacting the forum directly are what distinguish a technical problem from an apparent absence.
Remote attendance is not always the better option, and where evidence is contested, documents are voluminous or the connection is unreliable, attending in person is frequently easier.
Points to carry away
- Permission is usually required and is not automatic.
- Some hearing types are rarely heard remotely.
- Connection and documents need testing in advance.
- The environment forms part of the appearance.
- A failure plan should exist before the day.
Questions readers ask
Is permission needed to attend a hearing remotely?
Usually, though the answer varies by hearing type and by system. Directions appointments and short applications are frequently heard remotely by default, while contested evidential hearings and final hearings attract more scrutiny and sometimes a presumption of attendance in person. Permission for one hearing rarely carries forward to the next, so the request needs making each time, early enough for the arrangements to be put in place.
What is the most common technical failure?
Audio, by a wide margin. Video problems are visible and tolerated; sound problems halt hearings. Testing on the actual device, from the actual location, using the actual software is what prevents them, and a headset is generally better than a laptop microphone. A written note of the dial-in number and the joining details, kept somewhere accessible, is the difference between a two-minute interruption and an apparent absence.
What should happen if the connection fails during a hearing?
Say so immediately if any channel remains, then use the fallback in a planned order: a dial-in number, a second device, a mobile connection. If nothing works, contact the forum directly by telephone using details obtained in advance for that purpose. Simply disappearing is treated very differently from reporting a failure, and a short written note afterwards recording what happened protects the position if part of the hearing was missed.
Sources
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure — Rule 43(a), Testimony in Open Courtlaw.cornell.edu
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure — Rule 77(b), Place for Trial and Other Proceedingslaw.cornell.edu
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure — Rule 30(b)(4), Deposition by Remote Meanslaw.cornell.edu
- United States Courts — Court Website Linksuscourts.gov
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure — Rule 16, Pretrial Conferences and Schedulinglaw.cornell.edu
- Americans with Disabilities Act — Title II Regulationsada.gov
Urban Justice Docket is a publication, not a law firm. This article states general rules and cites its sources; it is not advice about any particular case, and the law differs by state and changes over time.
More in Hearings and Appearances
Failure to Appear, and What Follows
Non-attendance is treated as a failure regardless of the reason, and the hearing generally continues in the party's absence. What follows ranges from a decision on the matter to costs orders and, in some contexts, considerably more serious consequences. The route back depends on why the party was absent, how quickly they act, and whether they have a case worth hearing.
The Reasons a Postponement Is Granted
Postponements are granted where something genuinely prevents a fair hearing: illness, unavailability of essential evidence or witnesses, a recent and unavoidable change of representation, or a conflicting commitment that could not be avoided. They are refused where the reason is foreseeable, self-inflicted, unsupported by evidence, or amounts to a preference about timing.
How Much Notice of a Hearing Is Required
Rules generally specify a minimum interval between notice of a hearing and the hearing itself, calculated from service rather than from actual receipt and frequently expressed in business days. Where less notice is given, the remedy is usually an application to adjourn or to abridge, and it has to be made promptly rather than raised on the day.