Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: December 1, 2021
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.com
The COVID-19 pandemic forced courts to quickly adopt the use of virtual technology. Now, some of the changes are here to stay, at least in the Commercial Division of the New York Supreme Court.
On October 19, 2021, Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence K. Marks approved a new Commercial Division rule (22 NYCRR § 202.70(g)) that will permit virtual evidentiary hearings and non-jury trials, at the discretion of the judges and upon consent of the parties. Rule 36 is permanent and will take effect on December 13, 2021.
While the use of technology allowed New York courts to remain at least partly operational during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, its benefits are not limited to emergency situations. Given that New York is a commercial hub, the Commercial Division often hears disputes involving parties from all over the country. Virtual proceedings can make the litigation process more efficient for attorneys, litigants, and judges.
The Commercial Division Advisory Council first proposed making remote proceedings permanent last year. In a memorandum in support of the rule, the council wrote: “The primary reason the CDAC sees the need for such a rule is because allowing evidentiary hearings and non-jury trials to proceed virtually will reduce travel time and expense for clients, counsel, and witnesses.”
Rule 36 provides much-needed flexibility for New York commercial litigants. Nonetheless, it is important to note that all parties must agree before proceeding with virtual evidentiary hearings and non-jury trials. Additionally, because the new rule is permissive rather than mandatory, the court must also sign off.
Rule 36 also contains several requirements that must be met with regard to the video technology used. Specifically, the video technology used must enable:
Changes may also be coming to New Jersey. In a Notice to the Bar, dated July 16, 2021, the New Jersey Judiciary requested comments on the future of court operations, including the continued use of remote proceedings. The Notice noted that stakeholders have expressed interest in making some of the changes to court operations permanent. “Stakeholders specifically have requested that certain routine court matters continue to be conducted remotely so as to reduce time and money costs for attorneys, clients, and court users who otherwise would be required to miss work, school, or other obligations,” the Notice stated.
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, Ajoe Abraham, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-896-4100.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!