The Texas Supreme Court has propagated a new Rule to codify rules about when a zoom hearing can be authorized.  When COVID began, the Texas Supreme had authorized zoom hearing by a series of emergency orders.  The new rule in short allows the parties to agree to a zoom hearing.  The Court can compel a zoom hearing subject to a list of factors.  Presumably a zoom hearing is less likely the more complex and involved a hearing will be although the rule does not specifically say that.  It’s my opinion that lawyers and parties will in fact take advantage of zoom hearing for shorter cases involving limited evidence and that the Court’s in central Texas will offer that as a possibility.  While Travis County is not back to in person as of this writing, Hays County has been offering both an in person and zoom option in anticipating of this new rule.

    1. (b)  Method of Appearance.
      1. (1)  Unless the notice of court proceeding states otherwise, a person who participates in a court proceeding does so by physical presence in the courtroom. Upon appropriate notice by a party or the court, a court may allow or require a participant to appear at a court proceeding by videoconference, teleconference, or other available electronic means, except as otherwise provided in (2).
      2. (2)  A court must not require:
        1. (A)  a party or lawyer to appear electronically for a court proceeding in which oral testimony is heard, absent good cause or the agreement of the parties; or
        2. (B)  a lawyer, party, or juror to appear electronically for a jury trial, absent the agreement of the parties.
      3. (c)  Objection. A party may object to any method of appearance, stating good cause for the objection. The objection must be made within a reasonable time after the party receives notice of the appearance. Before proceeding by the objected- to method of appearance, the court must rule on the objection and timely communicate the ruling to the parties in a written order or on the record.
      4. (d)  Factors. In determining good cause under this rule, the court should consider factors such as:
        1. (1)  case type;
        2. (2)  court proceeding type;
        3. (3)  the number of parties and witnesses;
        4. (4)  the complexity of the legal and factual issues;
        5. (5)  the type of evidence to be submitted, if any;
        6. (6)  technological restrictions such as lack of access to or proficiency in necessary technology;
        7. (7)  travel restrictions such as lack of transportation, distance, and inability to take off work;
      5. (8)  whether a method of appearance is best suited to provide necessary language access services for a person with limited English proficiency or accommodations for a person with a disability; and
      6. (9)  any previous abuse of a method of appearance.