This article was originally published in October 2020.  The information has been reviewed and is up-to-date as of November 2021. Though the state of California is now opening up increasingly due to improving pandemic numbers, the details included in this blog continue to serve as helpful tips during this time.

I moved to Los Angeles from New York 12 years ago.  One of my favorite aspects of practicing law here was appearing in different courthouses throughout Southern California.  I enjoyed seeing the mountains as I drove out to San Bernardino or visiting many courthouses around LA and Orange County.  I also observed oral arguments, the judge’s rulings, and the attorneys (once I recall wondering at the Santa Monica courthouse if it was really acceptable to wear flip flops to court).   Similarly, I enjoyed traveling for depositions or mediations, where I would meet my clients in person.  Having that personal interaction, even with opposing counsel, was a nice change of pace from just being in an office interacting by phone or email.  Now, however, we are litigating in a pandemic, and many things we never thought about in litigation have changed.

First, for court appearances, instead driving around and walking into the courthouse, my commute is either to my kitchen or to my LCW office so I can appear remotely.  For my first remote video appearance at the Los Angeles Superior Court, I appeared from my LCW office, just to be sure I did not have any technology issues and there would be no family interruptions.  While initially there were some complications connecting, once it worked, I had an up close view of the judge and I was able to successfully argue the motions just like I was appearing in Court.  I was able to listen to the other matters before the judge that day, just like I would if I were in court in person, but I couldn’t always see the attorneys.  One aspect that was different, and true for all video calls, is that I am conscious of how I appear on camera – now sensitive to touching my face or even drinking water.  I also need to be mindful to speak more slowly and clearly to account for any lag or lack of clarity in the transmission.  Another issue is to be mindful of lighting and how it appears on the computer.  These additional considerations were never something one needed to consider when appearing in person, but on the bright side, you don’t need to worry about parking!  While I would still prefer to appear in person to argue motions when the pandemic ends, appearing by video was very effective and could be more efficient to alleviate travel time.

Second, depositions have gone remote.  When the pandemic first started, we thought we would be back in the office in a month or two, so we just postponed our depositions.  But as we realized we would be working remotely longer than we anticipated, we began taking remote depositions.  There were so many questions to consider.  How would we show witnesses’ exhibits?  Would the witnesses cheat – could they secretly be looking at notes they prepared in advance?  What if the witness didn’t have the equipment or technology at home to do a Zoom appearance?  Could the court reporter swear the witness in if they were not in the same place?  But as all attorneys and court reporters tackled these issues, we quickly worked them out.  Through Zoom, we can share documents, and the witness can be given control to look through all the pages of an exhibit.  We can ask the witness to move the camera around the room so we can see there are no notes or others present, and can ask the witness to put their phone behind them, and in a way that we can see them doing so on their computer’s camera.  When we realized the pandemic wasn’t ending any time soon, we deposed the plaintiff in a case by Zoom during the summer of 2020 and it was an effective and successful deposition; of course, Zoom depositions are now commonplace.  We were able to thoroughly cross-examine the witness just as we would in a conference room, and the court reporter was able to prepare the same transcript.  At one point the plaintiff became emotional and cried, which to me indicates the impact of the deposition was the same as being together in a conference room.   Zoom depositions also offer more flexibility in scheduling, and may make it easier for clients to attend.  In addition, I recently agreed to accommodate a non-party witness’s work schedule to take the deposition at 7:30 a.m.  If we all had to be in the office, it would be more difficult on everyone’s schedule, but now we just need to log onto Zoom from our homes.

Finally, mediations have also gone virtual.  Before the pandemic, a mediation typically involved both sides in separate rooms and the mediator going back and forth to reach a settlement.  Mediations often lasted into the early evening, settling when everyone was worn out after a long day.  There also was a lot of downtime when the mediator was with the other side, which gave the attorneys and clients time to chat and build more personal connections.  Mediations on Zoom are different.  During the pandemic, I participated in two Zoom mediations.  They were both shorter overall than I think they would have been in person; perhaps there was more of a desire to cut to the chase when everyone was in a room alone in front of a computer or people had Zoom fatigue.  There was also more free time, because often when the mediator was with the other side, everyone just muted and turned the camera off, and then we would be alerted when it was time to go back.  While this made for more efficient use of time, we lost some of the opportunities for personal connections (though in one mediation when we had some downtime, the mediator showed us how to play Scattergories online and we all shared our dogs on video).

As the pandemic hopefully winds down, we may continue to use technology for remote appearances at motion hearings, depositions, and mediations.  In addition, while we cannot do in-person witness interviews, Zoom allows us to connect face-to-face better than a telephone.  Senate Bill 1146 was enacted and signed by the Governor on September 18, 2020.  This law took effect immediately as urgency legislation and implements pandemic-related changes including permitting remote depositions at the election of the deponent or the deposing party, as well as changes for electronic service, electronic signatures, and trial continuances.


Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Alison Kalinski Alison Kalinski

Alison Kalinski is an experienced litigator representing independent schools and public agencies, including cities, counties, and special districts before state and federal court, arbitrations, and administrative agencies.  She represents clients on claims of harassment and discrimination, whistleblower retaliation, wage and hour violations, wrongful…

Alison Kalinski is an experienced litigator representing independent schools and public agencies, including cities, counties, and special districts before state and federal court, arbitrations, and administrative agencies.  She represents clients on claims of harassment and discrimination, whistleblower retaliation, wage and hour violations, wrongful termination, failure to accommodate, defamation, First Amendment, and due process violations from employees.  In addition, Alison defends schools in litigation on student issues, including disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, breach of contract, and defamation claims. Alison has argued before state and federal courts and the California Court of Appeal and has obtained a workplace violence restraining order to protect employees.

Alison Kalinski also regularly advises independent schools, including religious schools, nonprofit organizations, and public agencies in matters pertaining to employment and students. Alison is a trusted advisor to employers in all aspects of employment issues, including the hiring and termination of employees, the interactive process and leave requests, discrimination and harassment issues, assisting with investigations, overtime, and drafting employee handbooks and agreements.  In addition to employment advice, Alison counsels schools on student and parent issues, including bullying, student discipline, accommodating disabilities, enrollment agreements, student handbooks, parent and tuition disputes, and subpoenas. Alison especially enjoys working with schools and nonprofit clients by helping them meet their legal obligations while achieving their mission and maintaining the values of their school and organization.

Alison is also an experienced presenter and regularly trains clients on preventing discrimination, harassment, and retaliation in the workplace, accommodating disabilities in the workplace, mandated reporting, and other employment matters.

Prior to joining Liebert Cassidy Whitmore, Alison practiced as a litigator in the New York City offices of two international law firms before relocating to Los Angeles.  At her prior firms, Alison represented large private employers in class action litigation arising from gender discrimination and wage and hour matters, and obtained a full dismissal of all claims in both actions.

Committed to pro bono work, Alison obtained cancellation of removal under the Violence Against Women Act for a victim of domestic violence and sex-trafficking and obtained asylum for a refugee from Cameroon who was tortured for being a homosexual.

While in law school, Alison served as managing editor of the Tulane Law Review.  Upon her graduation magna cum laude, Alison clerked for the Honorable Steven M. Gold in United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.  Alison is admitted to practice in California and New York.